Industrial Waste
Management
-------
This Guide provides state-of-the-art tools and
practices to enable you to tailor hands-on
solutions to the industrial waste management
challenges you face.
WHAT'S AVAILABLE
• Quick reference to multimedia methods for handling and disposing of wastes
from all types of industries
• Answers to your technical questions about siting, design, monitoring, operation.
and closure of waste facilities
• Interactive, educational tools, including air and ground water risk assessment
models, fact sheets, and a facility siting tool.
• Best management practices, from risk assessment and public participation to
waste reduction, pollution prevention, and recycling
-------
^DGEMENTS
The fotawng members of the Industrial Waste Focus Group and the Industrial Waste Steering Committe aregrateMy
acknowledged far al of their time ana assistance in the development of this guidance document
'ICUS
.
r-oui own, nie isun viicamuti
Company
Walter Carey. Nestle USA Inc and
New Milford Farms
Rama Chaturvedi Bethlehem Steel
Corporation
H.C. Clark. Rice University
Barbara Dodds. League of Women
Voters
Chuck Feerick. Exxon Mobil
Corporation
Stacey Ford. Exxon Mobil
Corporation
Robert Giraud DuPont Company
John Harney, Citizens Round
Table/PURE
Kyle Isakower. American Petroleum
Institute
Richard Jarman, National Food
Processors Association
James Meiers, Cinergy Power
Generation Services
Scott Murto. General Motors and
American Foundry Society
James Roewer, Edison Electric
Institute
Edward Repa. Environmental
Industry Association
Tim Saybr, International Paper
Amy SchaRer, Weyerhaeuser
Ed Skemote. WMX Technologies. Inc
Michael Wach Western
Environmental Law Center
David Wels, University of South
"*—«• Medical Center
rat fewin. Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma
rocu?.
wu wom.nu. ^».u uiuu
Brian Forrestal. Laidlaw Waste
Systems
Jonathan Greenberg. Browning-
Ferris Industries
Michael Gregory, Arizona Toxics
Information and Sierra Club
Andrew Mites, The Dexter
Corporation
Gary Robbins, Exxon Company
Kevin Sail. National Paint & Coatings
Association
Bruce Sterer. American Iron & Steel
Lisa Williams. Aluminum Association
arid Territorial Solid Waste" "
Management Officials
Marc Crooks. Washington State
Department of Ecology
Cyndi Darling. Maine Department of
Environmental Protection
Jon Dilliard Montana Department of
Environmental Qualty
Anne Dobbs. Texas Natural
Resources Conservation
Commission
Richard Hammond. New York State
Department of Environmental
Conservation
Elizabeth Haven California State
Waste Resources Control Board
Jim HuD. Missouri Department of
Natural Resources
Jim Knudson. Washington State
Department of Ecology
Chris McGuire. Florida Department
of Environmental Protection
Gene Mitchell Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources
William Pounds. Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental
Protection
Bjjan Sharafkhani Louisiana
Department of Environmental
Qualty
James Warner, Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency
railKHa l*ujiit, mame LmpwUlRitlt Of
Environmental Protection
NormGumenik Arizona Department
of Environmental Qualty
Steve Jenkins, Alabama Department
of Environmental Management
Jim North Arizona Department of
Environmental Qualty
-------
Industrial waste is generated by the production
of commercial goods, products, or services.
Examples include wastes from the production
of chemicals, iron and steel, and food goods.
-------
RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING:
DRAFT TECHNICAL GUIDANCE
OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
401 M STREET, S.W.
WASHINGTON, B.C. 20460
NOVEMBER 1992
This document is distributed by the USEPA to update technical information contained in
other sources of USEPA guidance, such as Chapter Eleven of SW-846 (Revision 0,
September 1986) and the Technical Enforcement Guidance Document (TEGD).
-------
NOTICE
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names, commercial products,
publications does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
November 1992
-------
RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING:
DRAFT TECHNICAL GUIDANCE
November 1992
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND AND SCOPE 1-1
1.1 Overview of Ground-Water Monitoring Programs
Under Subpart F 1-2
1.2 Relationship of this Manual to the Regulations
and to Other Documents 1-3
CHAPTER TWO: DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH 2-1
CHAPTER THREE: DEFINING REQUIREMENTS AND TECHNICAL
OBJECTIVES 3-1
3.1 Defining Requirements 3-1
3.2 Defining Technical Objectives 3-1
3.3 Data Quality Objectives for RCRA Ground-Water
Monitoring 3-2
CHAPTER FOUR: CHARACTERIZING SITE HYDROGEOLOGY 4-1
4.1 Primary Investigation 4-5
4.2 Characterizing the Geology of the Site 4-7
4.2.1 Subsurface Boring Program 4-8
4.2.2 Laboratory Analyses of Soil, Unconsolidated
Material, and Rock Samples 4-16
4.2.3 Mapping Programs 4-17
4.2.4 Cone Penetrometer Survey 4-20
4.2.5 Geophysical Techniques 4-21
4.2.5.1 Geophysical Surveys - Surface
Techniques 4-24
4.2.5.2 Borehole Geophysical Techniques 4-29
4.2.5.3 Surface to Borehole, Cross Borehole
Geophysical Methods 4-35
November 1992
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
4.3 Characterizing Ground-Water Flow Beneath the Site 4-35
4.3.1 Introduction 4-36
4.3.2 Definition of the "Uppermost Aquifer" 4-38
4.3.3 Determining Ground-Water Flow Direction
and Hydraulic Gradient 4-39
4.3.3.1 Ground-Water Level Measurements 4-40
4.3.3.2 Establishing Horizontal Flow Direction
and the Horizontal Component of Hydraulic
Gradient 4-42
4.3.3.3 Establishing Vertical Flow Direction
and the Vertical Component of Hydraulic
Gradient 4-42
4.3.3.4 Seasonal and Temporal Factors 4-46
4.3.4 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity 4-47
4.3.4.1 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity Using
Field Methods 4-48
4.3.4.2 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity Using
Laboratory Methods 4-51
4.3.4.3 Data Evaluation 4-51
4.3.5 Determining Ground-Water Flow Rate 4-52
4.4 Interpreting and Presenting Data 4-52
4.4.1 Interpreting Hydrogeologic Data 4-52
4.4.2 Presenting Hydrogeologic Data 4-54
4.4.3 The Conceptual Model 4-58
November 1992
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
CHAPTER FIVE: DETECTION MONITORING SYSTEM DESIGN 5-1
5.1 Ground-Water Monitoring in Aquifers Dominated by
Ground-Water Flow Through Porous Media 5-1
5.1.1 Introduction 5-1
5.1.2 Placement of Point of Compliance Monitoring Wells .... 5-2
5.1.2.1 Location of Wells Relative to Waste
Management Areas 5-2
5.1.2.2 Lateral Placement of Point of Compliance
Monitoring Wells 5-4
5.1.2.3 Vertical Placement and Screen Lengths 5-5
5.1.2.4 Vadose Zone Monitoring 5-8
5.1.3 Placement of Background (Upgradient) Monitoring
Wells 5-10
5.2 Ground-Water Monitoring in Aquifers Dominated by
Conduit Flow 5-12
5.2.1 Introduction 5-12
5.2.2 Using Springs as Monitoring Sites in Aquifers
Dominated by Conduit Flow 5-13
5.2.3 Using Wells as Monitoring Sites in Aquifers
Dominated by Conduit Flow 5-14
5.2.4 Tracing to Identify Monitoring Sites in Aquifers
Dominated by Conduit Flow 5-16
5.2.5 Sampling Frequency in Aquifers Dominated by
Conduit Flow 5-18
5.2.6 Fracture Trace Analysis 5-20
November 1992
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
CHAPTER SIX: MONITORING WELL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION .... 6-1
6.1 Monitoring Well Drilling Methods 6-1
6.1.1 Hollow-Stem Augers 6-3
6.1.2 Solid-Stem Augers 6-9
6.1.3 Cable Tool 6-9
6.1.4 Air Rotary 6-10
6.1.5 Mud Rotary and Water Rotary 6-12
6.1.6 Dual-Wall Reverse-Circulation 6-13
6.1.7 Driven Wells 6-13
6.1.8 Jet Percussion 6-14
6.1.9 Decontamination of Drilling Equipment 6-14
6.1.10 Well Diameter 6-15
6.1.11 Stratigraphic Control 6-15
6.2 Well Casing and Screen Materials 6-16
6.2.1 General Casing and Screen Material Characteristics 6-19
6.2.2 Types of Casing Materials 6-26
6.2.3 Coupling Procedures for Joining Casing 6-37
6.2.4 Well Casing Diameter 6-38
6.2.5 Casing Cleaning Requirements 6-39
6.3 Well Intake Design 6-39
6.3.1 Well Screen 6-39
6.3.1.1 Screen Length 6-39
6.3.1.2 Screen Slot Size 6-40
6.3.2 Filter Packs/Pack Material 6-40
6.4 Annular Sealants 6-42
6.5 Surface Completion 6-44
6.6 Well Surveying 6-45
6.7 Well Development 6-46
6.8 Documentation of Well Design, Construction, and Development .... 6-50
6.9 Specialized Well Designs 6-52
6.10 Evaluation of Existing Wells 6-53
6.11 Decommissioning Ground-Water Monitoring Wells and Boreholes .. 6-53
November 1992
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
CHAPTER SEVEN: SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 7-1
7.1 Elements of the Quality Assurance Project Plan 7-1
7.2 Pre-Sampling Activities 7-2
7.2.1 Determining Sampling Frequency 7-3
7.2.2 Measurement of Static Water Level Elevation 7-4
7.2.3 Detection and Sampling of Immiscible Layers 7-6
7.2.4 Well Purging 7-7
7.3 Ground-Water Sampling Equipment Selection and Use 7-10
7.3.1 Grab Samplers 7-12
7.3.1.1 Double and Single Check Valve Bailers 7-12
7.3.1.2 Syringe Bailer 7-13
7.3.2 Pumps 7-13
7.3.2.1 Bladder Pumps 7-14
7.3.2.2 Helical Rotor Electric Submersible Pumps .... 7-14
7.3.2.3 Gas-Drive Piston Pumps 7-14
7.3.2.4 Gear-Drive Electric Submersible Pumps 7-15
7.3.2.5 Centrifugal Pumps 7-15
7.3.2.6 Peristaltic Pumps 7-16
7.3.2.7 Gas-Lift Pumps 7-16
7.3.2.8 Gas-Drive Pumps 7-16
7.3.3 Packer Assemblages 7-17
7.3.4 Decontaminating Sampling Equipment 7-17
7.3.5 Collecting Ground-Water Samples 7-18
7.4 In-Situ or Field Analyses 7-22
7.5 Sample Containers and Preservation 7-23
7.5.1 Sample Containers 7-23
7.5.2 Sample Preservation 7-24
November 1992
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section Page
7.6 Chain-of-Custody and Records Management 7-25
7.6.1 Sample Labels 7-25
7.6.2 Sample Custody Seal 7-26
7.6.3 Field Logbook 7-26
7.6.4 Chain-of-Custody Record 7-27
7.6.5 Sample Analysis Request Sheet 7-28
7.6.6 Laboratory Logbook 7-29
7.7 Analytical Procedures 7-29
7.8 Field and Laboratory Quality Assurance/Quality Control 7-30
7.8.1 Field QA/QC Program 7-31
7.8.2 Laboratory QA/QC Program 7-31
7.9 Evaluation of the Quality of Ground-Water Data 7-32
November 1992
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page
1 Techniques for Hydrogeologic Investigations 4-2
2 Factors Influencing the Density of Boreholes 4-9
3 Field Boring Log Information 4-15
4 Suggested Laboratory Methods for Sediment and Rock Samples 4-18
5 Outcrop Description Information for Measured Sections 4-19
6 Factors Affecting Number of Wells per Location (Clusters) 5-9
7 Drilling Methods for Various Geologic Settings 6-4
8 Applications and Limitations of Well Drilling Methods 6-5
9 Comparative Strengths of Well Casing Materials 6-23
10 Recommendations Regarding Chemical Interactions with Well Casings .... 6-25
11 General Recommendations for Selection of Well Casing Materials 6-36
12 Generalized Ground-Water Sampling Device Matrix 7-11
November 1992
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Page
1 Steps in Designing a Ground-Water Monitoring System 2-2
2 Possible Borehole Configurations For a Small Surface Impoundment 4-12
3 Iteration of Borehole Program at a Small Surface Impoundment 4-13
4 Example of a Potentiometric Surface Map 4-43
5 Example of Flow Net Derived from Piezometer Data 4-45
6 Example of a Containment Affecting the Integrity of a Confining
Layer 4-55
7 Example of a Topographic Map Constructed Within a 2-Foot Contour
Interval 4-56
8 Example of a Geological Cross-Section 4-59
9 Downgradient Wells Immediately Adjacent to the Hazardous Waste
Management Area Limits 5-3
10 Example of the Placement of Background Monitoring Wells 5-11
11 Distributary Springs Along the Green River near Mammoth Cave,
Kentucky, as Determined by Tracer Studies 5-15
12 Summary of Tracer Studies in the Karst of Fillmore County,
Minnesota, in the Vicinity of the Ironwood Landfill 5-19
13 Cross-Section of Typical Monitoring Well 6-17
14 Decision Chart for Turbid Ground-Water Samples 6-49
November 1992
viii
-------
APPENDICES
BIBLIOGRAPHY
EXAMPLES OF CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES FOR IDENTIFICATION OF ROCK
SAMPLES
CHEMICAL RESISTANCE CHART SHOWING THE CHEMICAL EFFECT OF
MANY CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS ON PVC, PTFE, AND STAINLESS STEEL
SOURCES OF HYDROGEOLOGICAL INFORMATION
November 1992
ix
-------
RCRA GROUND-WATER MONITORING:
DRAFT TECHNICAL GUIDANCE
INTRODUCTION
The hazardous waste management regulations for permitted facilities (40 CFR Part
264) were promulgated in July 1982 under Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). Subpart F of these regulations,
Releases From Solid Waste Management Units, sets forth performance standards for
ground-water monitoring systems at permitted hazardous waste land disposal facilities. These
standards require owners and operators of land-based hazardous waste management facilities
to sample and analyze ground water at specific time intervals to determine whether or not
hazardous wastes or constituents released from these facilities are contaminating ground
water.
This Manual was prepared by the Office of Solid Waste of the United States
Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA" or "Agency") to provide guidance for
implementing the ground-water monitoring regulations for regulated units contained in 40
CFR Part 264 Subpart F (hereafter referred to as "Subpart F"), and the permitting standards of
40 CFR Part 270. The Manual also provides guidance to owners and operators of treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) that are required to comply with the requirements of
40 CFR Part 264 Subparts J (Tank Systems), K (Surface Impoundments), L (Waste Piles), N
(Landfills), and X (Miscellaneous Units). While sections of this Manual can be used as
guidance for implementation of the ground-water monitoring regulations governing interim
status facilities contained in 40 CFR Part 265, the methods and procedures presented in this
Manual are designed for permitted facilities that are subject to the Part 264 regulations.
November 1992
-------
CHAPTER ONE
BACKGROUND AND SCOPE
The purpose of this Manual is to provide information that will assist facilities in
conducting RCRA ground-water monitoring programs. Specifically, this Manual discusses
techniques or procedures necessary to meet the requirements of the following sections of 40
CFR Parts 264 and 270:
§264.97(a)
§264.97(c)
§264.97(d) -
§264.97(e)
§264.97(f)
§264.196(d)(3)
§270.14(c)
§270.16(h)(l) -
§270.17(b)(l) -
§270.18(c)(l) -
General performance standards for ground-water
monitoring;
Well casing and annular seal requirements;
Sampling and analysis procedures;
Appropriateness of sampling and analytical methods;
Ground-water elevation measurements;
Geologic and hydrogeologic reports and the results of any
monitoring or sampling, if applicable, that are submitted
to the Regional Administrator in response to leaks or
spills and disposition of leaking or unfit-for-use tank
systems;
Additional information requirements for Part B Permit
Applications, and identification of the uppermost aquifer;
Hydrogeologic report for owners and operators of tank
systems seeking a variance from design and operating
requirements under §264.193(g);
Hydrogeologic report for owners and operators of surface
impoundments seeking a variance from the design and
operating requirements under §264.221(b);
Hydrogeologic report for owners and operators of waste
piles seeking a variance from design and operating
requirements under §264.251(b);
November 1992
1-1
-------
§270.21(b)(l) - Hydrogeologic report for owners and operators of
landfills seeking a variance from the design and operating
requirements under §264.30l(b); and
§270.23(b) - Hydrogeologic and/or geologic assessments for owners
and operators of miscellaneous units that are providing
information to address and ensure compliance with the
environmental performance standards of §264.601.
The Regional Administrator can, however, extend the Subpart F requirements to any
corrective actions specified in the permit, including those initiated under §264.101(c).
1.1 Overview of Ground-Water Monitoring Programs Under Subpart F
Subpart F outlines a three-phase ground-water monitoring program for regulated units.
"Detection monitoring," the first phase, involves at least semi-annual monitoring of
parameters and/or constituents that provide a reliable indication of the presence of hazardous
constituents in ground water. Detection monitoring is performed at permitted land based
disposal units not believed to be releasing hazardous wastes or constituents into the ground
water. If monitoring indicates a release, analysis of all Appendix IX constituents is required,
and the facility enters "compliance monitoring."
Compliance monitoring, the second phase, requires at least semi-annual monitoring for
those constituents detected in ground water during detection monitoring. A facility
performing compliance monitoring also monitors ground water for all constituents on
Appendix IX at least annually, and reports the concentration of any new compound detected
to the Regional Administrator. Detected compounds are then added to the list of analytes
monitored semi-annually. The concentrations of all compliance monitoring constituents are
compared to their permitted concentration levels, one of the elements of the facility's
ground-water protection standard, to determine whether or not corrective action is required.
If a unit in compliance monitoring contaminates the ground water above the allowable
concentration set forth in the facility's permit, the unit enters "corrective action," the third
phase of ground-water monitoring. In corrective action, a facility is required to "remove or
treat in place" (§264.100(e)) all hazardous constituents that are detected in ground water at
concentrations greater than their respective ground-water concentration limits specified in the
facility's permit. The monitoring associated with corrective action tracks the progress of the
clean-up and detects any other constituents entering the ground water at concentrations greater
than the allowable concentration limits.
November 1992
1-2
-------
1.2 Relationship of this Manual to the Regulations and to Other Documents
The regulations in Subpart F and 40 CFR Part 270 will continue to be the primary
location of the performance standards for ground-water monitoring, and the hazardous waste
permit information requirements, respectively. This Manual serves to elaborate upon the
applicable requirements and available options for meeting the performance standards. While
directly applicable only to monitoring regulated units at permitted RCRA facilities, the
contents of this Manual may provide useful guidance for other Agency ground-water
monitoring programs as well, particularly municipal solid waste landfills regulated under 40
CFR Part 258, RCRA facilities that are in interim status (regulated under 40 CFR Part 265),
RCRA facilities that are implementing the corrective action process for solid waste
management units (40 CFR Part 264 §264.101), and hydrogeologic investigations at
Superfund sites. The information contained in this Manual also could be useful for the design
and operation of ground-water monitoring systems required by any regulatory program (e.g.,
Toxic Substances Control Act).
In September 1986 the Agency released two documents relating to RCRA ground-
water monitoring: The RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance
Document (TEGD) and "Chapter Eleven - Ground-Water Monitoring" of EPA's manual titled
Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste (USEPA 1986c, commonly known as "SW-846").
The TEGD was distributed by the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE) and is the
most recent USEPA guidance document that specifically addresses RCRA ground-water
monitoring. The TEGD is presently available from the National Technical Information
Service (703/487-4650) as document number PB87-107-751 and from the Government
Printing Office (202/783-3238) as document number GPO:055-000-00-260-6. SW-846 is
developed by the Office of Solid Waste and provides sampling and analysis methodology
related to compliance with RCRA regulations. SW-846 is distributed through the Government
Printing Office as document number GPO:955-001-00000-1 .
This Manual has been developed by the Agency to update and supplement information
contained in the TEGD and Chapter Eleven of SW-846 to assist the regulated community in
addressing the requirements Subpart F. The TEGD provides guidance for interim status
facilities that have not received an operating permit and are thus subject to the requirements
specified under 40 CFR Part 265. Whereas the TEGD was written primarily for the use of
enforcement officials when implementing the interim status provisions, 40 CFR §265.90 et
seq, this Manual was written to assist and direct owners and operators of permitted facilities
in the design and implementation of ground-water monitoring programs. Although written for
use by owners and operators of permitted facilities, Chapter Eleven of SW-846 was not
intended to function as a comprehensive guide for ground-water monitoring; rather, it is a
short listing of ground-water monitoring protocols.
The Agency recognizes that the science of ground-water monitoring is advancing and
therefore, has issued this Manual to present viable new methodologies. Most of the
November 1992
1-3
-------
hydrogeologic principles presented in the TEGD apply directly to permitted facilities as well
as to those in interim status, and are the basis for much of the guidance presented in this
Manual. Consequently, this Manual and the TEGD have a strong relationship and in certain
cases may be used together to provide support for regulatory and facility owner/operator
personnel. The contents of this Manual also are based on a review of the available open
literature, and on other existing Agency and State enforcement and permitting guidance
documents. In most cases, the procedures and methods presented in this Manual reflect
technical findings presented in other Agency guidance documents. In a few cases, the weight
of evidence in the open literature supports a deviation from the most recent Agency guidance.
As a result, some of the procedures and recommendations included in the TEGD and in
Chapter Eleven of SW-846 have been re-evaluated based on current scientific findings, and
revised for inclusion in this Manual.
As stated previously, this Manual applies to permitted land disposal facilities operating
under 40 CFR Part 264. The TEGD, Chapter Eleven of SW-846, and this Manual are,
however, related thematically in terms of site characterization, monitoring well system design
and installation, and sampling and analysis. To the extent that this Manual provides more
current guidance on these ground-water monitoring activities, those individuals presiding over
interim status facilities may wish to consult this Manual as a reference. In addition, the
following documents are key references for this Manual and are readily available to the
public:
Aller, L., T.W. Bennett, G. Hackett, RJ. Petty, J.H. Lehr, H. Sedoris, D.M.
Nielsen, and I.E. Denne. April 1989. Handbook of Suggested Practices for the
Design and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells. EPA/EMSL-Las
Vegas, USEPA Cooperative Agreement CR-812350-01, EPA/600/4-89/034,
NTIS #PB90-159807.
Barcelona, M.J., H.A. Wehrmann, M.R. Schock, M.E. Sievers, and J.R. Karny.
September 1989. Sampling Frequency for Ground-Water Quality Monitoring.
EPA Project Summary, EPA/600/S4-89/032, NTIS #PB-89-233-522/AS.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich, and E.E. Garske. September 1985.
Practical Guide for Ground-Water Sampling. USEPA, Cooperative Agreement
#CR-809966-01, EPA/600/2-85/104.
USEPA. November 1991. Seminar Publication — Site Characterization for
Subsurface Remediation. EPA/625/4-91/026, 259 pp.
USEPA. July 1991. Handbook - Ground Water. Volume II: Methodology.
EP A/625/6-90/016b.
November 1992
1-4
-------
USEPA. September 1990. Handbook - Ground Water, Volume I: Ground
Water and Contamination. EPA/625/6-90/016a.
USEPA. May 1989. RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) Interim Final
Guidance (4 vols). EPA/530/SW-89-031, OSWER Directive 9502.00-60, NTIS
#PB89-200299.
USEPA. December 1987a. A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations
Methods. EPA/540/P-87/001.
Because the TEGD and the documents listed above are more comprehensive than this
Manual, it may be necessary to refer to them when applying the procedures discussed herein.
November 1992
1-5
-------
CHAPTER TWO
DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH
This Manual describes procedures that the Agency believes are the most appropriate
for designing, installing, and operating a detection monitoring system. This Manual also
describes the basic approach that an owner/operator should take in designing a detection
monitoring program. Figure 1 outlines this basic approach. Briefly, the steps are as follows:
STEP 1 Define the data that are required from a regulatory perspective, and develop
technical objectives to meet those requirements (Chapter Three).
Steps 2, 3, 4, and 5 are considered the hydrogeologic investigation for the site (Chapter Four).
STEP 2 Perform a preliminary investigation. The preliminary investigation is a
comprehensive review of existing information relating to the site. This
includes a thorough review of available literature and, if available, existing
field data. The purpose of the preliminary investigation is to characterize, to
the extent possible, the hydrogeology of the region and the site, and to gather
information that will be useful in planning field investigations. The
preliminary investigation also includes characterizing the chemical and physical
properties of the wastes or constituents of concern to the extent that this
information is available.
STEP 3 Develop, using regional and site-specific data, a conceptual model of site
hydrogeology. The conceptual model should be based on the regional
hydrogeology and on the preliminary investigation, and should be used as the
basis for designing field investigations at the site.
STEP 4 Perform field investigations at the site. The field investigations will include
one or more of the following techniques:
Subsurface boring programs;
Laboratory analyses of soil, unconsolidated material, and rock samples;
Geologic and hydrogeologic analyses;
Mapping programs;
Electric cone penetrometer surveys; and
November 1992
2-1
-------
Hydrogeologic Investigation
Define Regulatory Requirements and
Technical Objectives
I
Conduct Preliminary
Investigation
c
Develop Initial Conceptual Model
(Basis of the Field Investigation)
Conduct Field
Investigation
C
I
Refine Conceptual Model
(Basis of the Monitoring System Design)
Design Ground-Water Monitoring
System
Install Ground-Water Monitoring
System
Collect, Analyze, and Evaluate Ground-Water
Samples and Data
i
Evaluate the Ground-Water Monitoring System with respect
to the Regulatory Requirements and Technical Objectives.
Refine the Conceptual Model.
Refine the Ground-Water Monitoring System, if necessary.
550 A-1
STEPS IN DESIGNING A GROUND-WATER MONITORING SYSTEM
FIGURE 1
November 1992
2-2
-------
Geophysical surveys.
STEP 5 Continue to develop and refine a conceptual model of the site based on the
field investigations. The conceptual model will form the basis for the design of
the ground-water monitoring system. The conceptual model should be based
on information of sufficient amount and quality to ensure that the monitoring
system will fulfill the established regulatory requirements and technical
objectives. The quantity of data required will vary with the hydrogeologic
complexity of the site. Facilities located in complex hydrogeologic settings
require more hydrogeologic data than facilities located in less complex settings.
STEP 6 Design a detection monitoring system consisting of both downgradient
monitoring wells that intercept and monitor the potential pathways of
contaminant migration, and background (e.g., upgradient) monitoring wells that
provide representative samples of background ground-water quality (Chapter
Five).
STEP 7 Install downgradient monitoring wells and background (e.g., upgradient)
monitoring wells (Chapter Six).
STEP 8 Collect and analyze ground-water samples from downgradient and background
monitoring wells (and from springs or the vadose zone, when appropriate) at
the frequency specified in the facility permit (Chapter Seven).
STEP 9 Evaluate the ground-water monitoring system with respect to the regulatory
requirements, the technical objectives, and the accuracy of the conceptual
model. Refine the ground-water monitoring system, if necessary (Chapter Six).
Each of the steps presented in Figure 1 is discussed in detail in the sections of the
Manual noted. The Manual does not discuss the statistical evaluation of ground-water
monitoring data. Guidance for the statistical evaluation of ground-water monitoring data is
presented in EPA's April 1989 publication entitled "Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water
Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities - Interim Final Guidance" (USEPA, 1989a) and any
subsequent addenda to this publication.
The approach described above relies heavily on the development and refinement of
conceptual models. A conceptual model is an understanding of the hydrogeologic
characteristics of a site, and of how the hydrogeologic characteristics are integrated into a
hydrogeologic system that contains interacting and dynamic components. The Agency
strongly emphasizes that the process of developing a conceptual model of a site is ongoing.
After a ground-water monitoring system has been installed and numerous ground-water
samples have been collected, the conceptual model for a site may be further refined.
November 1992
2-3
-------
CHAPTER THREE
DEFINING REQUIREMENTS AND TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES
One of the most important steps in the design and implementation of a ground-water
monitoring program is defining the data, analyses, and information that are required from a
regulatory standpoint. The next step is to develop technical objectives to meet those
requirements. Once requirements are identified and objectives are developed, the
owner/operator should thoughtfully consider the activities necessary to achieve the
requirements and objectives. One of the keys to implementing a successful monitoring
program is planning activities that logically progress to obtain the desired information.
3.1 Defining Requirements
As stated previously, owners and operators of TSDFs are required to comply with both
the ground-water monitoring regulations contained in Subpart F and with the permitting
standards of 40 CFR Part 270 Subpart B. This Manual is also applicable to owners and
operators of TSDFs who are required to comply with 40 CFR Part 264 Subparts J (Tank
Systems), K (Surface Impoundments), L (Waste Piles), N (Landfills), and X (Miscellaneous
Units) when preparing hydrogeologic reports for various regulatory purposes. For owners and
operators of TSDFs, the initial step in conducting a ground-water monitoring program should
be to define the regulatory requirements with which they are required to comply.
The sources of applicable requirements will depend on whether a facility is designing
a proposed ground-water monitoring program to submit with its permit application, or is
already permitted and is designing a program or a portion of a program in response to a
permit requirement. In the latter case, under the permit-as-a-shield provision of 40 CFR
§270.4, the permit will contain, either expressly or by reference, all of the applicable
requirements. In the former case, the program should comply with all applicable regulatory
requirements of Parts 264 and 270 (or with applicable State regulations in an authorized State,
along with any applicable EPA regulations promulgated under the authority of the Hazardous
and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) which the State is not authorized to
administer). The requirements and objectives of a facility's hydrogeological investigations
and/or ground-water monitoring programs should always be discussed with the appropriate
EPA representative prior to initiating any activities.
3.2 Defining Technical Objectives
In a broad sense, technical objectives are the data or information that the
owner/operator wants to obtain. Technical objectives are typically developed to satisfy
regulatory requirements. This Manual discusses the basic data necessary for meeting the
performance standards for the design and implementation of a RCRA ground-water
November 1992
3-1
-------
monitoring program. Performance standards, rather than specifications, are set forth in
Subpart F because of the diversity of the environmental settings in which regulated units
exist, and because of the need to tailor monitoring systems to fit each setting. While this is
still the philosophy behind the regulations, the Agency has found through experience that it is
necessary to provide specific protocols to guide the implementation of some portions of the
ground-water monitoring regulations. This Manual presents protocols that correspond to the
following areas: 1) a comprehensive review of existing information (Chapter Four); 2) the
characterization of site hydrogeology, particularly the hydrogeology of the uppermost aquifer
(Chapter Four); 3) choosing ground-water monitoring locations (Chapter Five); 4) well design
and construction (Chapter Six); and 5) sample collection and analysis (Chapter Seven).
3.3 Data Quality Objectives for RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring
Inherent in the development of technical objectives is the determination of what
quality of data is required or desired. Chapter One of SW-846 addresses Quality Assurance
(QA) programs and Quality Control (QC) procedures that should be implemented by owners
and operators who are conducting ground-water monitoring programs pursuant to RCRA.
Chapter One of SW-846 states that it is the goal of EPA's QA program to ensure that all data
be scientifically valid, defensible, and of known precision and accuracy. Data should be of
sufficient known quality to withstand scientific and legal challenges relative to the use for
which the data are obtained. The QA program is management's tool for achieving this goal.
All activities implemented pursuant to Subpart F (i.e., hydrogeologic site
investigations, design and installation of ground-water monitoring wells, sampling, and sample
analysis) should include a QA and QC program as required by §264.97(e). The QA/QC
programs should be part of the facility permit application (§§270.14(c)(5), 270.14(c)(6)(iv)
and 270.14(c)(7)(vi)) and operating record (§264.97(e)). QA/QC programs should meet the
specifications of Chapter One of SW-846.
Chapter One of SW-846 defines fundamental elements of a data collection program:
1. Design of a project plan to achieve the data quality objectives (DQOs);
2. Implementation of the project plan; and
3. Assessment of the data to determine if the DQOs are met.
DQOs for the data collection activity describe the overall level of uncertainty that a
decision-maker is willing to accept in results derived from environmental data. This
uncertainty is used to specify the quality of the measurement data required, usually in terms
of objectives for precision, bias, representativeness, comparability, and completeness. As
described in Chapter One of SW-846, the owner/operator should define the DQOs prior to the
initiation of the field and laboratory work. Also, the owner/operator should inform the field
November 1992
3-2
-------
and laboratory organizations performing the work of the DQOs so that their personnel may
make informed decisions during the course of the project to attain those DQOs. The
procedures that an owner/operator uses to characterize the hydrogeology of a site, to design
and construct a monitoring network, to collect and analyze environmental samples, and to
evaluate analytical results should ensure that the data are of the type and quality necessary to
allow for the detection of contamination when hazardous waste or hazardous constituents have
migrated from the waste management area to the uppermost aquifer (§264.97(a)(3)).
EPA is using DQOs to define the type and quality of data required to support specific
regulatory decisions. DQOs include both qualitative and quantitative data performance
specifications. The type of data required is defined by a set of qualitative specifications that
indicate the characteristics of the environment to be measured and the circumstances such
measurements are intended to represent. The quality of data required may be specified in two
ways: 1) qualitatively, as a set of procedures to follow for collecting data, or 2)
quantitatively, as the amount of error (imprecision and bias) that may be tolerated in data
without incurring an unacceptable probability of making incorrect or inappropriate decisions.
This Manual represents a qualitative specification of data quality, requiring that certain
procedures be followed when collecting hydrogeologic data. All projects that generate
environmental data in support of RCRA should have a QA Project Plan (QAPjP). The
recommended components of a QAPjP are provided in Chapter One of SW-846.
Field and laboratory operations should be conducted in such a way as to provide
reliable information that meets the DQOs. To achieve this, certain minimal practices and
procedures should be implemented, as outlined in Chapter One of SW-846. The applicable
ground-water monitoring regulations contained in 40 CFR Parts 264 and 270 outline
additional required practices and procedures. In addition, Chapter One of SW-846 specifies
the information that should be contained in project documentation. Moreover, both this
Manual and the TEGD provide supplemental information and guidance for conducting field
operations.
November 1992
3-3
-------
CHAPTER FOUR
CHARACTERIZING SITE HYDROGEOLOGY
The adequacy of a ground-water monitoring program largely depends upon the
quantity and quality of the hydrogeologic data used in designing the program. Clearly, if the
design of the monitoring well system is based on incomplete or inaccurate data, the system
will not fulfill its intended purpose. Because of the complexity of site characterization and
ground-water monitoring system design, owner/operators should discuss the intended approach
with the appropriate State or EPA Regional office prior to finalizing site characterization
plans.
When characterizing the hydrogeology of a site prior to designing a monitoring well
network, owner/operators should be concerned with questions relating to data quantity and
quality:
(1) Has enough information been collected to identify and adequately characterize
the uppermost aquifer and potential contaminant migration pathways? Does the
information allow for the placement of monitoring wells that are capable of
immediately detecting releases from the regulated unit(s) to the uppermost
aquifer?
(2) Have appropriate techniques been used to collect and interpret the information
that will be used to support the placement of monitoring wells, and is the
quality and the interpretation of the information satisfactory when measured
against the program's DQOs?
The answers to these questions will establish whether or not the site characterization is
adequate. The Agency recognizes that the quantity of site characterization information and
the appropriateness of investigation techniques vary according to site-specific conditions.
Sites in complex geologic settings require more hydrogeologic data for ground-water
monitoring system design than do sites in less complex settings. Likewise, investigatory
techniques that may be appropriate in one geologic setting or for one waste type, may be
inappropriate in another setting or for a different waste type.
This section identifies techniques that can be used to characterize a site prior to
installing a monitoring well network, and describes the factors that should be considered when
evaluating whether a particular method is appropriate in a specific case.
Table 1 lists a number of investigatory techniques commonly used to conduct
hydrogeologic investigations. Also listed are preferred methods for presenting the data
generated from a hydrogeologic investigation. Many States and Regions also may request or
November 1992
4-1
-------
C/)
z
(A
m
u
a
o
JliJ
03 (3
•
z
cc
o
LL
3
g
z
o
c
3
CD
DC
C
CO
CO
CO
1-
^*
o
,5s
CD
5
>.
o^
"o
CD
D)
0
±i
^
arrative summary c
z
c
«
^
•-
0
> Review of existin
c
o
"co o
N CO
._ ^
» 3
BdD
C0{0
0"5
£•
to
'E
01
o
o
CB
en
S
2
arrative summary c
tratigraphic column
z en
«3
CD
Q
co" E '°
•S « to
•= .2 o
to ^ o
P o »=
c •»= CO
"O CO i;
111
o eg ^
c " (G
O •— "O
o ro c
c 2. S
1j ® if
C O
5^ ffi "S
> Subsurface borir
soils): lithologic ;
of subsurface me
JO >.
.2 8s
"S <°
Is
to
to
£
S-
w
c
o
"O
to
c
1
(0
8
o
o
o
"o
o
o
0)
0
^—
CO
o
.E
"
to
€
'3T
"S
s
8
IS
Dpographic maps (
H
c
'2
O! o>
q>_g
«_ g
to CD
ii
si
•t S
li
•s 1
CD /«
• Laboratory analy
size (sieve) anah
of
^_
2" , .
•^ "cfl
jj in ^-~ co
& g "a 1? a.
1- ? » ? £
"° ^ 0 '6 3
£ 0) CM 0 0
•— rS _• • x_ ^i co
| 1 b | § |
S « S- i 2
® "§> 5 CD 3 "o
5 -I _ .g § a
CO
"c ^
II 1 1 a
tj3 ($ Q) 3**
|| | >. | I
o S^ '?™ Cd (B S*"> T3
•| x g o | g- E
§,>, r S" s TO «
°8 1 " 1 1 1
£>§ >- i5 S. a. -6
1! I t l 1 i
S & 0 5 o < 0
T3
c
CO
CD
o
•i
i
•g
.52
>•
co
c
CO
"ffi
5.
5
c
(0
T3
9
CL
CO
.2
^
"ai
Drehole geophysics
J2
<0
CO
1
E
"S
tn
"to
"5
c
ID
jj^
1
Q.
®
]£
T3
C
(0
to
"S
T3
S <»
co «
DC S
erial photographs
<
to
o
"S
esults of modelling
EC
o
s~
S"
CVJ
ten
"D
c
CM
an
"o
CO
"c
CD
CD
O"
CD
E
I
_ 0)
:= O
0
.i: o
fl> o
SI
D.=
CO g
.9 CD
.C -Q
S CO
O.E
o
CM
13
C
co
CM
ten
CD
"5
tr
CD
CS
C
CB
a.
_tg
"S
T3
CD
I
CD
XJ
>v
CO
O!
O
"o
^
CL
CD
OJ
TABLE 1
November 1992
4-2
-------
TJ
01
O
3,
-
X
DC
O
u.
CO
111
3
O
z
o
ui
C
O
t>
3
TJ
Data Presentation and Data Ri
03
03
ZJ
5"
"c
*~
o
1-
o
15
gj
03
03
c
03
t-
o
"3
.5*
15
o
£
> Narrative summary of hydrology and
c
_o
"5
E
J5
"c
^
'S>
o
e
T>
^
CD
^p
"co
1
"o
1
CC
*
c
_o
£0
_N
2
CO
jr
O
hydrogeochemistry
03
a>
Q.
E
3
CL
"5
S
O1
3
J2-
1 Aquifer tests
I
o
o
O)
o
TJ __
^** ^
^<0
• Hydrogeochemical maps
i
flowmeters)
aS
13
s^
TJ "w
§'£
0 «
C JZ
C3O
03
Q.
<0
Horizontal and vertical flow nets
5T
tri
03
CM
(D
03
in
*°~ -*
V)
<13
5»s
"5
c
^
as
*
3
ET
• Ground-wate
• Fracture trace maps
O5
_c
0)
^
"5
O)
<$
"5
TJ
To
.0
_o
o
"S
E
i™
C/
T5
d
CO
"S
1 Meteorologic
> Maps of flow routes in karst terranes
S
TJ
S
o
^TITT
TJ
C
(0
"tn
e
0!
x:
o
• Surface wate
,0
"5
2
•f-j
*"*.
• Hydrographs
• Estimates of hydraulic conductivity, h;
gradient, rate of ground-water flow
•2
"tn
03
.*_<
J3
'5
tr
P3
• Raw data and interpretive analysis of
TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)
November 1992
4-3
-------
require that all data be submitted in a computer-readable form. If the level of site
characterization necessary to design a RCRA ground-water monitoring program is sufficient,
it will be possible to obtain the information listed in the last column of the table. This
information ultimately will be used to develop a conceptual model of the site prior to
designing the ground-water monitoring system.
At a minimum, the site investigation should always include direct methods of
determining site hydrogeology (e.g., subsurface borings, water level elevation measurements,
textural analysis of soil samples). Indirect methods (e.g., aerial photography), especially
geophysical methods (e.g., resistivity and seismic surveys), may provide valuable information
for planning direct field measurements. Information obtained by indirect methods also can be
used in conjunction with information obtained by direct techniques to interpolate geologic
data between points where direct measurements are made. Information gathered by indirect
methods alone will not provide the detailed information necessary for complete
characterization of a site, however. Conclusions drawn from indirect site investigation
methods (e.g., geophysical surveys, aerial photography) should be confirmed by, and
correlated with, direct measurements. Lithologic data obtained from cone penetrometer (CPT)
surveys should be compared with lithologic information obtained from adjacent
conventionally-drilled and sampled boreholes to verify the CPT results. When geophysical
surveys are used to characterize a site, information from geophysical surveys should be used
in conjunction with other physical data both to verify the initial interpretations of the
geophysical methods and to provide constraints to remove some of the non-uniqueness of the
geophysical data.
A site investigation should include characterization of:
The subsurface materials below the owner/operator's hazardous waste facility,
including:
The lateral and vertical extent of the uppermost aquifer;
The lateral and vertical extents of upper and lower confining
units/layers;
The geology at the owner/operator's facility (e.g., stratigraphy,
lithology, structural setting); and
The chemical properties of the uppermost aquifer and its confining
layers relative to local ground-water chemistry and hazardous wastes
managed at the facility, as it relates to the parameters specified in 40
CFR Part 265.
November 1992
4-4
-------
Ground-water flow below the owner/operator's hazardous waste facility,
including:
The vertical and horizontal directions of ground-water flow in the
uppermost aquifer;
The vertical and horizontal components of hydraulic gradient in the
uppermost aquifer;
The hydraulic conductivities of the materials that comprise the
uppermost aquifer and its confining units/layers; and
The average linear horizontal velocity of ground-water flow in the
uppermost aquifer.
The following sections outline the basic steps of a site hydrogeologic characterization,
and detail methods for collecting and presenting data.
4.1 Preliminary Investigation
The preliminary investigation is a comprehensive review of the available information
relating to the site. The preliminary investigation has two purposes: (1) to allow the
owner/operator to formulate conceptual models of regional and site-specific hydrogeology,
and (2) to provide a basis for designing field investigations that will be used to obtain data to
refine the conceptual model of the site. This investigation should be performed prior to
conducting a field investigation and designing and installing a ground-water monitoring
system.
The owner/operator should review the available information about the hydrogeology of
the site and the surrounding region to gain an understanding of the stratigraphic distribution
of soil, unconsolidated materials, and rock, and of the surface and ground-water systems. The
preliminary investigation should include the review of the following information, as available:
The waste management history of the site, including:
A chronological history of the site that includes a description of the
wastes and raw materials managed (treated, stored, or disposed) on-site;
A summary of documented releases from waste, product, or materials
management/storage areas;
November 1992
4-5
-------
Information concerning the structural integrity of waste management
units and physical (e.g., structural) controls on waste migration from the
units; and
The chemical composition and character of wastes contained in waste
management units throughout their history, and those wastes expected to
be contained in the units in the future (e.g., waste analyses, leachate
analyses, leachate generation rates, percent solids, and the past, present,
and expected future chemical interaction of the waste and the geologic
and soil units underlying the waste).
Information obtained from a literature review, including:
Reports of academic research (e.g., dissertations and theses) performed
in the area of the site or for the same aquifer(s) at the site;
Journal articles;
Studies, reports, or literature from local or regional offices, such as local
water offices, planning commissions, and health departments;
Studies and reports provided by state geologic surveys or state water or
environmental offices; and
Studies and reports obtained from Federal offices, such as the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS).
Reports of previous investigations performed at the facility, or nearby facilities
(e.g., the results of any previous sampling and analysis efforts).
Climatic data, including precipitation, wind (direction and velocity), and
evapotranspiration data.
Topographic, geologic, soil, hydrogeologic, geohydrochemical, fracture trace,
and conduit maps and aerial photographs.
Other readily available information, for example:
Records documenting local influences on ground-water flow (e.g., on-
or off-site pumping wells, irrigation or agricultural use, tidal variations,
river stage variations, land use patterns, local waste disposal practices);
November 1992
4-6
-------
Geologic and environmental assessment data available in state and
Federal project reports for local dams, highways, subway systems, and
other major construction projects;
Logs from local private or public water supply wells; and
Logs from building construction and quarry activities.
Appendix 4 provides a comprehensive list of sources of information that may be
consulted during the preliminary investigation stage of the hydrogeological investigation.
Information collection activities should be supplemented by a site reconnaissance to
substantiate concepts developed from the preliminary investigation and to help identify
problems that require resolutions during subsequent site investigation activities.
A properly conducted preliminary investigation is necessary for planning the direction
and scope of subsequent field investigations. For example, information on stratigraphy,
depositional environment, and tectonic history can be used to estimate the distribution and
types of geologic materials likely to be encountered at the site. Topographic maps can assist
in defining the locations of recharge or discharge areas, such as lakes, swamps, springs, and
streams, and the locations of faults or fractures as indicated by surface drainage patterns.
Geologic maps depict the locations of geologic contacts and provide the lithology of geologic
units, as well as depicting the locations of faults, fractures, and folds. Information on
regional ground-water flow rates and directions, depth to ground water, potentiometric surface
elevations, water quality and chemistry, local ground-water pumping, evapotranspiration rates,
transmissivities, storativities, and surface water hydrology allows for an effective first
approximation of the site-specific hydrogeologic setting.
The owner/operator should develop a preliminary conceptual model of the site based
on the information collected during the preliminary investigation. The conceptual model
should incorporate all essential features of the system under study, and should be tailored to
the amount, quality, and type of information available at each stage of the investigation. This
model is an essential element for planning the subsequent field investigation (e.g., the initial
placement of boreholes) and should be revised and updated as additional information becomes
available and as new interpretations are made. A final conceptual model, incorporating the
information collected during the site characterization activities described in the following
section, is essential for designing an adequate detection monitoring system.
4.2 Characterizing the Geology of the Site
After completion of the preliminary investigation, subsurface samples (e.g., soil
samples, unconsolidated material samples, rock borings) should be collected and lithologically
or pedologically classified so that the lithology, stratigraphy, and structural characteristics of
the subsurface are identified. As stated previously, indirect methods of geologic investigation
November 1992
4-7
-------
such as geophysical studies may be used to plan and augment direct field methods, but should
not be used as a substitute for them.
4.2.1 Subsurface Boring Program
All hydrogeological site investigations should include a subsurface boring program to
identify the lithology, stratigraphy, and structural characteristics of the subsurface.
Information obtained from boreholes is necessary to characterize the subsurface at a site and
to identify potential contaminant migration pathways.
A subsurface boring program should be designed as follows:
The initial number of boreholes and their spacing should be based on
information obtained during the preliminary investigation and on the spatial
orientation of the waste management units. Initial boreholes should be drilled
to provide sufficient information to determine the scope of a more detailed
evaluation of geology and to identify potential contaminant migration pathways.
Boreholes should be spaced closely enough so that accurate cross-section(s) can
be constructed. Factors that influence the initial number of borings are listed
in Table 2.
Additional boreholes should be drilled as needed to provide more information
about the site and to refine the conceptual model. The number and placement
of additional boreholes should be based on a preliminary conceptual model that
has been refined with data obtained from initial boreholes and other site
investigatory techniques (e.g., geophysical investigations).
Samples should be collected from boreholes at all suspected changes in
lithology. The deepest borehole drilled at the site should be continuously
sampled. For boreholes that will be completed as monitoring wells, at least
one sample should be collected from the interval that will be the monitoring
well intake interval (i.e., screened interval or open (uncased) interval). EPA
recommends that all borings be continuously sampled to obtain good
strati graphic control.
All borehole samples should be collected with a Shelby tube, split barrel
sampler, rock corer, or other appropriate device.
Borehole samples should be classified according to their lithology or pedology
by an experienced geologist. Owner/operators should ensure that samples of
every geologic formation, especially all confining layers, are collected and
described, and that the nature of stratigraphic contacts is determined. EPA
recommends that owners/operators take color photographs (with scale) of
November 1992
4-8
-------
TABLE 2
FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DENSITY OF BOREHOLES
Factors That May Substantiate
Reduced Density of Boreholes
Factors That May Substantiate
Increased Density of Boreholes
"Simple" geology (e.g., horizontal, thick,
homogeneous geologic strata that are
continuous across site and are unfractured)
substantiated by site-specific geologic
information
Use of electric cone penetrometer surveys with
additional tools, i.e., d.c. resistivity, sampling
Use of surface geophysical methods to correlate
hydrogeologic data between bore- holes.
Suggested methods: d.c. resistivity, seismic
refraction and reflection, electro- magnetic
induction, and ground penetrating radar
Use of surface to borehole.,and cross borehole
geophysical methods to interpret complex
subsurface geological structure. Suggested
methods: d.c. resistivity, seismic refraction and
reflection, electromagnetic induction, and
ground penetrating radar
Fracture zones, conduits in karst terranes
Suspected pinchout zones (i.e., discontinuous
strata across the site)
Tilted or folded geologic formations
Suspected zones of high hydraulic conductivity
that would not be defined by drilling at large
horizontal intervals
Laterally transitional geologic units with irregular
hydraulic conductivity (e.g., sedimentary facies
changes)
November 1992
4-9
-------
representative samples from the boring. Where boreholes are drilled or cored
through fractured rock, the boreholes, cores, or samples should be used to
determine the orientation of the fractures. Keys and MacCary (1971) and Keys
(1988) discuss the application of borehole geophysics to fracture
characterization.
Geophysical techniques can be used to plan and supplement the subsurface
boring program. For example, surface geophysical surveys may be used to
verify and modify the initial conceptual model prior to drilling boreholes.
Based upon the results of the geophysical surveys, boreholes can be effectively
located to obtain necessary hydrogeologic information. Information obtained
from initial boreholes can be used to evaluate the geophysical data and resolve
any ambiguities associated with the preliminary interpretation of the
geophysical survey results. When continuous sampling is not performed,
borehole geophysical methods should be used to correlate unsampled with
sampled core sections. The use of surface to borehole geophysical methods
may allow better resolution of geophysical and borehole data, and may help
delineate the subsurface geology between boreholes.
Any borehole that will not be completed as a monitoring well should be
properly decommissioned. When considering the installation of ground-water
monitoring wells in the vicinity of decommissioned boreholes, owners and
operators should ensure that borehole sealant materials (e.g., cement) will not
alter the chemistry of the ground water to be monitored.
The objective of a subsurface boring program is to begin to refine the broad,
conceptual model derived during the preliminary investigation to better reflect the true
site-specific hydrogeologic conditions. In other words, the boring program is necessary to
directly investigate and to describe the geology of the area beneath the facility, and place it in
the context of the regional geologic setting.
In some situations, it may be necessary to drill through actual or possible confining
layers at a site. Special precautions should be taken when investigators believe they may
encounter a confining layer during drilling. Moreover, if field personnel suspect they may
have encountered a possible confining layer while drilling a borehole, drilling should be
stopped immediately and the borehole should be decommissioned. Investigators, in
conjunction with the appropriate regulatory authority, may then develop an appropriate
method for drilling through the confining layer. Extreme care should be taken when drilling
into confining units so that the borehole does not create a pathway for the migration of
contaminants, particularly dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs), between upper and
lower hydraulically separated saturated zones. In all cases, owners and operators should
prevent DNAPL mobilization (e.g., through gravity-driven transport) when drilling boreholes.
November 1992
4-10
-------
Owners and operators should obtain approval from the Regional Administrator prior to
implementing a plan to drill through a possible confining layer.
There are at least two approaches for drilling through confining layers. Based on site-
specific conditions, one or both of these approaches may be appropriate:
Install the first boreholes on the perimeter of the site (in less contaminated
areas or uncontaminated areas). The initial boreholes could penetrate the
confining zone to allow characterization of the lower units. This approach is
essentially to monitor from the "outside in." At a minimum, boreholes
upgradient of the source (and upgradient of a DNAPL and/or dissolved-phase
plume) could be drilled through the possible confining layer to characterize the
geology of the site. The appropriateness of this approach should be evaluated
on a site-specific basis (e.g., DNAPLs may migrate in directions different from
ground-water flow).
Drill the boreholes using techniques that minimize the danger of cross-
contamination between water-bearing zones. Such techniques typically involve
drilling an initial borehole partially into the possible confining layer, installing
(grouting in) an exterior casing, emplacing grout in the cased portion of the
borehole, and drilling a smaller diameter hole through the cased off/grouted
portion of the borehole (i.e., telescoping casing) through the confining layer.
Millison et al. (1989) provide an example of the use of telescoping casing to
prevent cross-contamination of aquifers. The appropriateness and actual design
of telescoping borings and casings should be determined on a site-specific
basis. Telescoping boreholes may be completed as wells or piezometers.
A subsurface boring program usually requires more than one round of borehole
installation. The number, placement, and depth of initial borings should be planned to
provide sufficient information upon which to plan a more detailed site characterization. An
example of a simple boring program is illustrated in Figure 2. If characterization is largely
achieved with the initial placement, fewer additional boreholes and fewer additional indirect
investigations will be necessary. In most cases, however, the Agency believes that additional
boreholes will be necessary to complete the characterization because most hydrogeologic
settings are relatively complex, even to experienced ground-water scientists. Figure 3
illustrates how subsequent borings and supplementary indirect techniques can be added to an
initial boring configuration to characterize the site-specific geology.
Drilling logs and field records should be prepared detailing the following information:
The lithology or pedology (i.e., geologic or soil classification) of each geologic
and soil unit in the unsaturated and saturated zones, including the confining
layer. The classification system used for lithologic and pedologic descriptions
November 1992
4-11
-------
'/
>v\
X
_ - -*v -
SURFACE
/ V IMPOUNDMENT \J\
/ / V^ __ -Z?** \
\
saw**"
Vines
\
100' 200'
LEGEND
BOREHOLE AND PIEZOMETER
FENCE DIAGRAM LINE
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY LINES
SURFACE
IMPOUNDMENT
t
Establish geological strike
and orient geophysical
survey lines
LEGEND
• BOREHOLE AND PIEZOMETER
A A1 LINE OF SECTION
A A
_ _ GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY LINES
550A-4b
POSSIBLE BOREHOLE CONFIGURATIONS FOR A SMALL SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT
FIGURE 2
November 1992
4-12
-------
100' 200'
LEGEND
O INITIAL BOREHOLE AND PIEZOMETER
• NEW BOREHOLE AND PIEZOMETER
TT" UNEOFSECTION '
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY LINES
FIGURE 3
November 1992
4-13
-------
should be a system described in the literature, and should be summarized or
referenced in the permit application. For example, soils may be described
using the Unified Soil Classification System, and rock may be described using
the classification schemes of Dunham (1962) for carbonates, Pettijohn et al.
(1972) for sandstones, Potter et al. (1980) for shales, and the common textural
and compositional classification schemes for igneous and metamorphic rock
(e.g., rhyolite, granite, basalt, schist, slate, marble, gneiss, etc.). Examples of
these classifications schemes are presented in Appendix 2;
Descriptions of the structural features encountered. As applicable, this should
include a description of planar features (e.g., bedding planes, graded bedding),
lineations, and other features related to vegetation, and discontinuities. The
orientation of these features should be measured and described when possible;
Moisture content (saturated, moist, dry), degree of weathering, color
(referenced to standardized colors when possible (e.g., Munsell color for moist
soil and unconsolidated materials)), and stain (e.g., presence of mottles, Fe203),
as applicable;
If a field monitoring device (e.g., FID, PID) is used, the data from these
measurements, including sampling method, background and sample
concentrations, probe type, span setting, and calibration gas type and
concentration, should be provided to EPA as part of the boring log or field
record;
Depth to the water table;
Depth to water-bearing unit(s) and vertical extent of each water-bearing unit;
Depth of borehole and reason for termination of borehole;
Depth, location, and identification of any evidence of contamination (e.g., odor,
staining) encountered in borehole;
Observations made during drilling (e.g., advance rate, water loss); and
Observations made during soil, unconsolidated material, or rock sampling (e.g.,
blow counts, sample recovery).
The subsurface boring log should contain at least the information identified with an
"X" in Table 3. Aller et al. (1989) provide an example format for a field boring log.
November 1992
4-14
-------
TABLE 3
FIELD BORING LOG INFORMATION
General
x Project (facility) name
x Hole name/number
x Date started and finished
x Geologist's name
x Driller's name
• Sheet number
x Hole location; map and elevation
(surveyed)
x Rig type, bit size/auger size, hammer type
x Sampling equipment used
x Classification scheme used for soils
(e.g., USDA textural classification system, or
unified soil classification system)
x Classification scheme used for rocks
(see Appendix 2 for examples)
Information Columns
x Depth of borehole
x Sample depth/number/type
x Blow counts and advance rate
x Percent sample recovery
x Narrative description
x Depth to saturation (nearest 0.01 foot)
Narrative Description
• Geologic Observations (include depth, description):
x soil/unconsolidated
material/rock type
x color and stain
x texture
x gross petrology
• friability
x moisture content
x degree of weathering
x presence of carbonate
minerals
Drilling Observations:
x loss of circulation
x advance rates
• rig chatter
x depth to water table or
saturation
x drilling difficulties
x fractures
x solution cavities
x bedding, formation
boundaries
x discontinuities:
e.g., foliation
x water-bearing zones
x dip of bedding,
foliations, etc.
• fossils, with a taxonomic
identification (i.e.,
brachiopod, trilobite, etc.)
x changes in drilling method
or equipment
x readings from detective
equipment, if any
x amount of water yield or
loss with depth
Other Remarks:
• equipment failures
x possible contamination of soil/groundwater
x deviations from drilling plan
x weather
x sedimentary structures
x presence of organic
matter
x odor
x suspected contaminants
x amounts and types of
any drilling fluids used
x presence of running sands
x caving/hole stability
x reason for termination
of borehole
x Indicates items that the owner/operator should record, at a minimum.
550A-5
November 1992
4-15
-------
4.2.2 Laboratory Analyses of Soil, Unconsolidated Material, and Rock
Samples
In addition to the field descriptions outlined above, the owner/operator should conduct,
where necessary, laboratory analyses of each significant geologic unit and each soil zone in
the unsaturated and saturated zones. These analyses can provide the following information:
Mineralogy and chemistry of the aquifer and confining units or layers, as
determined by optical and analytical techniques (e.g., microscopic analysis and
other analyses such as cation exchange capacity, atomic absorption
spectroscopy, inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy, and X-
ray diffraction). In some circumstances, such as where high concentrations of
solvents may come into contact with a clay confining layer, it is important to
characterize the clay mineralogy accurately;
Petrographic analysis of the confining layer and each unit above the confining
unit/layer to determine petrology and petrologic variation including:
composition and degree of cementation of the matrix,
composition, degree of sorting, size fraction, and textural variation in
the framework grains, and
existence of small-scale structures that may affect fluid flow;
Moisture content and moisture variation of each significant soil zone and
geologic unit;
An estimate of hydraulic conductivity of each significant soil, unconsolidated
material or rock unit in the unsaturated zone as determined by constant head
and falling head laboratory permeability tests on core samples that have been
collected in a manner that minimizes sample disturbance. The results of
laboratory hydraulic conductivity tests should be evaluated and used carefully
because these tests may not quantify secondary permeability factors that are
important in contaminant migration;
General composition of the sample as determined by examination of
unconsolidated materials with a binocular microscope;
Particle size analyses of unconsolidated or poorly consolidated samples using
sieves and/or pipettes to determine gravel-sand-silt-clay content and the size
range of sand and silt particles.
November 1992
4-16
-------
Table 4 lists these and other suggested methods for laboratory analysis of soil,
unconsolidated materials, and rock samples. Laboratory methods for determining the
properties of subsurface samples are provided by ASTM, and by both the American Society
of Agronomy and the Soil Science Society of America.
4.2.3 Mapping Programs
Subsequent to the generation and interpretation of site-specific geologic data, the data
should be presented in geologic cross-sections, topographic maps, geologic maps, and soil
maps. The Agency suggests that owners/operators obtain or prepare and review topographic,
geologic, and soil maps of the facility, in addition to site maps of the facility and waste
management units. In cases where suitable maps are not available, or where the information
contained on available maps is not complete or accurate, detailed mapping of the site should
be performed by qualified and experienced individuals.
Although topographic coverage of the entire United States is available through the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), owners and operators may find that detailed or smaller-scale
topographic information is not directly available for their facility. Many facilities have been
successful in preparing topographic maps, or altering or updating existing topographic maps
(such as those obtained from local government offices), to include the level of detail
appropriate for a site-specific hydrogeologic investigation. Often this includes adding
information such as the locations of small or intermittent streams, wetlands, topographic
depressions, and springs, or adding additional contours (i.e., decreasing the contour interval of
the map to 2 or 5 feet) to existing maps. Developing a topographic map for the facility will
generally require employing a conventional or photogrammetric survey company that develops
topographic maps by obtaining data aerially. This information may be supplemented with
information obtained from stereoscopic aerial photographs (Waste Management, Inc., 1989).
Wetlands information may be obtained from National Wetlands Inventory Maps which was
developed by the National Fish and Wildlife Service. This information is available through
the USGS.
The USGS has prepared geologic maps at the 1:24,000 scale (7.5 minute quadrangle)
for less than 10% of the United States. Consequently, it is likely that geology will not have
been mapped at most facilities. Moreover, geologic mapping is generally not as easy to
perform as topographic mapping, and the information provided on a geologic map obtained
from the USGS may not be as detailed as topographic information. While mapping of
outcrops is impossible in areas where geologic strata are not exposed at the surface, detailed
mapping of exposed strata at and in the vicinity of the facility may provide necessary
information on the local stratigraphic and structural setting. Field (1987) provides a detailed
discussion of a RCRA site that required extensive geologic analysis by EPA Region II for a
ground-water monitoring waiver determination. Table 5 lists the information that should be
recorded during a mapping program. In general, for mapping of outcrops, the following
information should be provided:
November 1992
4-17
-------
SUGGESTED LABORATORY METHODS FOR SEDIMENT AND ROCK SAMPLES
Sample Type
Parameter
Laboratory Method
Used to Determine
Geologic formation,
unoonsolidated sediments,
consolidated sediments
Hydraulic conductivity
Grain-size distribution
Soil moisture content
Soil particle specific
gravity
Petrology/pedology
Mineralogy/confining day
mtnetaiogy/chemistry
Contaminated samples
(e.g.. soils producing
higher than background
organic vapor readings)
Atterberg limits
SoilpH
Appropriate subset of
Appendix IX parameters
Total organic carbon
Falling head, constant
head test
ASTMD422
ASTMD2216
ASTMD854
Petrographic analysis
Atomic absorption
spectropholomelry.
Cation exchange
capacity (see SW-846),
X-ray diffraction
ASTMD427
(see SW-846)
(see SW-846)
(see SW-846)
Hydraulic conductivity
Well screen slot size
Estimate of porosity
Estimate of porosity
Rock type, soil type
GoodieinBvtry, potential
flow pains, chemical
compatibility
Soil cohesweness
pH effect on sorption
Identity and concentration
of contaminants
Contaminant mobility and
time required for ground-
water dean-up
TABLE 4
November 1992
4-18
-------
OUTCROP DESCRIPTION INFORMATION FOR MEASURED SECTIONS
General
x Project (facility) name
• Outcrop location with reference to
an easily identified landmark
• Names of nearby landmarks
x Location of outcrop plotted on the
appropriate USGS topographic
map (7.5 minute quadrangle)
x Geologist's name
x Citation of reference(s) in which earlier
descriptions of the outcrop were published
x Narrative of regional stratigraphy and
structural history
• Narrative of regional land/water use
Information Columns
x Thickness of measured section
(nearest inch)
x Sample location/number
x Major minerals or grain types present
x Rock name or soil name
x Narrative description
Narrative Description
x Rock types and stratigraphic names
x Bed thicknesses (nearest inch)
x Colors and stains
x Gross petrology and mineralogy
• Grain sizes (range)
• Friability and parting
• Degree of weathering
• Age of strata, rf known (both
relative and absolute)
x Presence of carbonate minerals
x Evidence of karstification (e.g.. solution cavities)
x Strike and dip of bedding, foliation, etc.
x Joints/fractures and their orientation
x Unconformities and their orientation
x Faults and folds and their orientation
• Fossils, with a taxonomic identification
x Indicates items that the owner/operator should record, at a minimum, if an outcrop mapping program
is necessary.
TABLES
November 1992
4-19
-------
Location of rock exposure(s) on a topographic map, particularly with respect to
the site being investigated, including strike and dip measurements for
sedimentary rock strata, and orientation, bearing and plunge measurements for
predominant metamorphic/igneous linear features (large and small scale).
Photograph(s) of exposure(s).
Measured section, with name(s) of stratigraphic units present. A measured
section includes a bed-by-bed description of the exposure using appropriate
lithologic terminology. A scale drawing or photograph of the section,
including sample locations, should be part of the outcrop description.
Structural features such as folds, faults, joints, fractures, cleavage, schistosity,
and lineation. Other features that can control the hydraulic properties of the
units such as solution cavities also should be noted. It is important to
determine the orientation of these features, as they may exert significant
influence on the local or regional movement of ground water. When
sedimentary strata are nearly horizontal and structurally uncomplicated, the
orientation of any joints not parallel to bedding should be determined, as
movement of ground water along joints and bedding planes can be a significant
part of the ground-water flow regime.
Where fractures, faults, or subsurface conduits exist, maps of fracture traces, fault
traces, and subsurface conduits should be included as part of, or in addition to, the geologic
map prepared for the site. Mapping of subsurface conduits is successfully accomplished by
performing tracer studies. Fracture trace mapping is performed by analyzing aerial
photographs, and is often supplemented with information from field reconnaissance, tracer
tests, and/or geophysical investigations.
Soil maps are typically available from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Soil
Conservation Service. A soil map should be prepared for facilities that do not have one
available, or for facilities where existing soil maps are incomplete or out-of-date (e.g., soils
have been disturbed). A soil survey will involve mapping soils with respect to their unit and
type, based primarily on grain size distribution.
4.2.4 Cone Penetrometer Survey
Cone penetrometer testing (CPT) consists of advancing an electric, telescoping
penetrometer tip into a subsurface formation to determine the end bearing and side friction
components of penetration resistance (ASTM D3441-86). Application of the CPT method is
limited by the availability of equipment and by the relatively few contractors that offer
conventional or specialized CPT services. In all cases, lithologic data obtained from CPT
November 1992
4-20
-------
surveys should be compared with lithologic information obtained from conventionally-drilled
and sampled boreholes at the site to verify the CPT results.
Conventional CPT tools record bearing pressure on the conical penetrometer tip as a
function of depth. Penetrometer tools equipped with a calibrated friction sleeve attachment
allow for the interpretation of subsurface lithologic changes on a continuous vertical scale
based on cone and friction resistance criteria (Sangerlat, 1972; Schmertmann, 1978).
Measured CPT values also are used to estimate relative formation density and bearing
capacity variations as a function of depth. CPT surveys are applicable to many sites where
the subsurface formations are uncemented and unlithified, free from impenetrable obstructions
such as rock ledges, hardpans, caliche layers, or boulders, and where cone advancement can
be achieved through the formation with minimal stress to the testing equipment. Dependent
upon the site geology, a standard CPT survey can be used as a reconnaissance tool to provide
preliminary site data for planning, or the surveys can be integrated into a broader
investigation program to provide supplemental data between widely spaced drill holes or other
data measurements. At sites where the technique is applicable, CPT surveys can provide a
continuous vertical profile of subsurface stratigraphy and indicate formation permeability.
Cone penetrometer devices are used in off-shore and land-based applications. The
equipment is highly portable and can be adapted to a variety of specialized applications.
Instruments are commonly truck-mounted with equipment to manipulate the probes and rods
and to record and interpret the survey results. Other versions of the tools can be adapted to
drill rods for use with a drilling rig. In addition to conventional surveys that measure the
mechanical response of the formation to the CPT probe, specialized probes have been
developed that can provide measurements of in situ pore pressure, formation resistivity,
formation thermal response to penetration, and seismic source detection. Further probe
specialization can provide measurement of soil moisture by nuclear methods, in situ
pressuremeter measurements, formation fluid and gas sampling, and soil sampling.
Application of CPT is limited to sites where mechanical penetration of the subsurface
formation can be achieved through the zone of interest. In some cases, the penetrometer used
in combination with a drilling rig can allow the CPT survey to progress through difficult
subsurface zones by penetrating these zones ahead of the survey. The continuous survey is
interrupted at these points and no data are collected.
4.2.5 Geophysical Techniques
Geophysical surveys, including surface and borehole methods, are conventionally
applied to site investigations as a means to obtain subsurface information over broad lateral
and vertical extents of the investigated area. The applicability of a particular method or tool
to a site is contingent on the purpose of the survey and the scope of the site investigation.
Integration of one or more geophysical techniques into an overall site investigation plan can
maximize the amount of information obtained for the site and can potentially allow extension
November 1992
4-21
-------
of geological interpretations beyond the limits of physical data locations (drillholes, outcrops,
soil gas survey points, aerial photography, satellite imagery), provided that sufficient
confidence is established between the interpreted geologic and geophysical models. Applied
in this complementary manner, the geophysical and physical sampling data provide the means
to optimize and direct the site investigation. The U.S. EPA's "Geophysical Expert Advisor
System, Version 1.0" (1989) software is a tool for assisting in the selection of appropriate
site-specific geophysical techniques.
Surface geophysical techniques include resistivity, electromagnetic induction, ground
penetrating radar, seismic refraction and reflection, and gravimetry. The precise physical
location and elevation (land survey) of the geophysical measurement points, transects, or grids
in site or other coordinate systems are integral to conducting successful geophysical surveys
in the field that can be readily interpreted with other site data. Information regarding surface
and borehole geophysical surveys and their applications to hydrogeologic investigations is
abundant in the literature. Several general references include Driscoll (1986); Schlumberger
(1989); Ellis (1987); Benson et al. (1982); Telford et al. (1976); and Zhody et al. (1974).
Borehole geophysical techniques are conventionally applied as a suite of tool
measurements that, when used in combination, allow the interpreter to determine physical
properties of the formation. Borehole surveying is advantageous in that it provides a means
for continuous measurement of in situ parameters and provides elements for the development
of a three dimensional site model when combined with other site data. A wide array of tools
are available that measure formation neutron and gamma ray attenuation, natural gamma ray
radiation, sonic wave propagation and formation imaging, formation resistivity and
conductivity, spontaneous potential, downhole/crosshole detection of seismic sources, and
borehole size and direction. Formation properties that can be interpreted from the measured
log data include: formation porosity, density, resistivity, conductivity, and spontaneous
potential; clay content estimation; water saturation and water quality estimation; permeability
estimation; formation dynamic elastic moduli; and fracture detection (Schlumberger, 1989).
General limitations in the application of surface geophysical techniques are related to
the resolution of the surveys and to the non-unique interpretation of the measured data. The
capacity of a surface geophysical method to resolve (detect) small scale, isolated sources is
not typically a goal of a large scale geologic or hydrogeologic investigation. However,
location of buried containers, voids, trenches or other smaller scale objects is a primary goal
of investigations at many hazardous waste sites. Because surface geophysical techniques are
commonly conducted along transect lines that intersect to form a grid over the area of
interest, the resolution for a particular survey target can be enhanced by careful planning and
adjustment of the survey transects. More closely spaced transect lines will provide more data
points over the same area of interest. Attendant with the collection of more data, however, is
the increased level of effort required for data collection and processing. The ability of a
specific geophysical instrument to adequately measure details of the geology at a specific site
is also contingent on the selection of the proper technique for the application. Techniques
November 1992
4-22
-------
that are dependent on subsurface contrasts in density, velocity, or salinity, for example, will
not adequately resolve details of the geology in formations where these physical contrasts are
minimal.
Limitations associated with borehole geophysical surveys are generally related to
individual tool response in different environments. As with surface geophysical techniques,
the proper tools should be selected for the individual application formation or borehole
conditions. Typical borehole geophysical surveying requires specialists trained in tool
operation and handling and data collection. Collected data will routinely require corrections
for borehole conditions prior to interpretation.
The potential for multiple interpretations of geophysical data results from the large
number of potential combinations of subsurface conditions that can occur to produce the
measured response. The limits in resolution and non-uniqueness in interpretations of
geophysical methods should be recognized. Isolated surveys with no supporting information
should be carefully interpreted. Information from geophysical surveys should be utilized in
conjunction with other physical data to verify the initial interpretations of the geophysical
methods and provide constraints to remove some of the non-uniqueness. In more complex
areas, surface to borehole and cross borehole geophysical methods may be considered to
delineate subsurface structure (Dobecki and Romig, 1985). However, application of multiple
geophysical methods at a site is not a guarantee that one survey will resolve the ambiguities
of another survey.
Equipment for performing many surface geophysical surveys is available from a
variety of sources, and include modern, computerized microprocessors and electronics.
Although the equipment can generally be operated by trained technicians, all aspects of data
collection, processing, and interpretation will require the oversight of a qualified geophysicist,
geologist, or ground-water scientist having extensive experience with the equipment operation
and data interpretation. Borehole geophysical equipment is highly specialized and will
require a qualified contractor to obtain the logs.
Johnson and Johnson (1986) discuss some of the problems that are commonly
encountered when using geophysical techniques to investigate the shallow subsurface. These
problems include:
Incorrect Method Applied - Possible causes include lack of understanding of
geophysical technology, site conditions or survey objectives;
Poor Data Quality - Possible causes include high ambient noise, poor field
procedures, improper use of equipment, faulty equipment, adverse geologic
conditions, or inexperienced operators;
November 1992
4-23
-------
Poor Interpretation - Possible causes include an inadequate interpretation
method, insufficient background information, or insufficient or noisy data;
Insufficient Data - Possible causes include a lack of understanding of methods
and/or site conditions and objectives, operator inexperience, or lack of
up-to-date plotted data in the field (some contractors gather data but do not plot
it or look at it until they are back in the office).
4.2.5.1 Geophysical Surveys - Surface Techniques
Surface geophysical methods, as previously noted, are useful in mapping subsurface
conditions over a broad area of interest. The measurements are particularly useful when they
are integrated into an overall site investigation program where they can be interpreted along
with other available information for the site. The techniques are useful both as a means of
rapid site reconnaissance that can provide information for planning subsequent field activities,
and also in extrapolation of existing data to previously uninvestigated areas — provided that
sufficient site-specific correlations have been established between the physical feature being
extrapolated and the geophysical survey. Survey data should be collected, processed, and
interpreted by a qualified geophysicist, geologist, or ground-water scientist familiar with the
theory, application, interpretation, and limitations of the applied geophysical techniques.
Direct Current (DC) Electrical Resistivity Methods
The direct current (DC) resistivity method is used to measure the bulk resistivity of
soil or rock volumes occurring between the measuring electrodes. This technique utilizes
electric currents that are introduced into the ground through electrodes or long line contacts.
The apparent resistivity of the subsurface volume is determined by measuring the potentials at
other electrodes in the vicinity of the current flow (Telford et al., 1976). The objective,
through the use of inverse modeling and curve matching, is to obtain the true resistivities and
layer thicknesses of the subsurface geologic strata from the apparent resistivities measured at
the ground surface. In ground-water studies, DC resistivity techniques can be used to model
the geoelectric response of the bulk formation and to estimate ground-water quality (Zhody,
1974; Stollar and Roux, 1975; Van Dam, 1976; Rogers and Kean, 1980; Urish, 1983).
The electrical resistivity technique is used for lateral profiling or vertical electric
sounding. Through application of both techniques, a vertical geoelectric cross-section of the
subsurface along the survey transect can be obtained. Lateral profiling techniques enable the
scientist to map lateral changes in subsurface electrical properties along a transect line to a
finite investigation depth related to the spacing of the measurement electrodes and the applied
current. Vertical electrical sounding measures vertical changes in subsurface resistivity as the
measuring electrode is moved various finite distances away from a stationary electrode at the
center of the measurement array. Qualified interpretation of sounding data can provide an
estimate of the depth and thickness of subsurface layers having contrasting apparent
November 1992
4-24
-------
resistivities. Information generated from multiple resistivity profiling and sounding arrays can
be used to produce two- and three-dimensional geoelectric models.
Resistivity techniques are dependent on resistivity contrasts in subsurface materials and
predictably will not be useful at sites where measurable contrasts do not exist. The accuracy
of resistivity methods is limited by several factors including: heterogeneity in surface and
subsurface conditions, proximity of human-made sources of electrical interference, departure
of the subsurface structure from a horizontally-layered model, and the inherent lack of a
unique data interpretation (Mooney, 1980; Mooney and Wetzel, 1956; Urish, 1983; and
Telford et al., 1976). Field procedures for conducting electrical resistivity surveys are
relatively more tedious than other applicable techniques such as electromagnetics.
Seismic Methods
Seismic survey methods of subsurface exploration are based on the principle that
seismic waves, consisting of compressional and shear pulses, emanate from a seismic source
(e.g., hammer blow, large weight drop, explosion, pipe gun, vibratory source) and travel
through subsurface soil and rock at velocities that vary with the elastic properties of the
materials. Two surface geophysical methods commonly applied to hydrogeologic
investigations include seismic refraction and seismic reflection. Seismic surveys are typically
conducted along intersecting traverses to provide a grid of measurements over the survey area
and to allow for two-dimensional contouring of velocity, depth, or thickness at each geophone
location. The geometry of the established grid is related to the goals of the survey, known
data, cultural features, and surface obstructions.
Seismic refraction is used to determine the thickness and depth of subsurface geologic
layers having contrasting seismic velocities. In the presence of sufficient subsurface contrasts,
refraction techniques can be used to map depths to specific horizons, including bedrock
surfaces, clay layers, and the water table.
Equipment necessary for conducting seismic refraction surveys includes a seismic
source, geophones, a seismograph, and a qualified operator. Equipment for conducting
seismic surveys has become sophisticated in recent years so that high quality data are
accessible for most applications. The following technological developments have greatly
improved the quality of collected refraction data: relatively low-cost, multi-channel
seismographs; increased geophone sensitivity and improvements in multi-shot pattern
surveying; signal enhancement; and digital signal processing.
The seismic source typically consists of a sledgehammer blow or explosive detonation
at or slightly below the ground surface. The use of explosives is warranted in many
applications where extensive loose material is present at the surface or when a higher energy
source pulse is needed. The seismic source transmits elastic waves traveling at different
velocities into the subsurface where they are refracted at the interfaces between layers having
November 1992
4-25
-------
contrasting impedances. A geophone array at the ground surface detects the refracted wave
arrival at each geophone and allows for measurement of the travel time from source to
detector. Geophone arrays for engineering studies can range from 12 to 48 channels
depending on the survey goals. The measured travel time data at each geophone is
interpreted from multiple shot points to determine the velocity, thickness and depth of the
subsurface layers that exhibit sufficient contrast to be distinguished as seismic layers.
Seismic refraction profiling has several limitations, the most severe of which include
the presence of blind zones (hidden layers with insufficient velocity contrast) and velocity
reversals. The interpretation of refraction data requires the assumption that velocity increases
progressively as a function of depth. A velocity reversal consisting of a lower velocity layer
underlying a higher velocity layer is undetectable at the surface. Field procedures are
relatively slow in the absence of sufficient crews for running seismic lines and setting
geophones. Extraneous noise resulting from cultural features, wind, traffic, trains, or other
sources of seismic waves can be controlled to a certain degree through filtering, signal
stacking, geophone selection, geophone burial, logistics, and noise source control. The use of
explosives as a source requires that extra safety precautions be exercised by field personnel
and that a licensed explosives expert be responsible for explosives control, handling, and
detonation.
Seismic reflection surveying methods are capable of obtaining continuous vertical and
lateral profiles of the subsurface geology using generally the same equipment requirements as
the refraction method. Shallow seismic reflection applications have, until recently, been
hindered by the lack of high frequency, short pulse seismic sources and by the inability to
overcome severe noise constraints generated by near surface ground "roll" phenomena.
The "optimum window" and "optimum offset" shallow seismic reflection profiling
techniques described by Hunter et al. (1984) have been used to map overburden and bedrock
reflections occurring at depths greater than approximately 60 to 100 feet in areas where large
velocity contrasts are observed. The optimum window shallow reflection technique is based
on the location of a shot-geophone spacing that allows non-normal incident reflections to be
observed with minimum interference from ground roll or from direct and refracted waves.
The resolution of the reflection method depends on the frequency of the seismic
energy that can be returned from the target reflector to the surface (Pullan et al., 1987), and
on the control of ground roll phenomena through filtering and the use of higher frequency
geophones. Optimum conditions for the technique occur when near-surface sediments are
fine-grained and water saturated (Pullan et al., 1987).
The shallow seismic reflection technique requires a geophysicist or geologist
experienced in the application and interpretation of the obtained seismic records. In contrast
to seismic refraction data, seismic reflection records can require sophisticated computer
processing and corrections to enhance the coherent features observable in the traces.
November 1992
4-26
-------
Refraction surveying is frequently necessary along the same transect line to resolve shallow
velocity relationships.
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) technology uses repetitive, high-frequency (80-1000
MHz), short time duration (nanoseconds) electromagnetic energy radiated into the ground to
acquire continuous subsurface profile data along a transect. The electromagnetic pulses are
emanated using a broad bandwidth radar antenna that is placed in close proximity to the
surface and is electromagnetically coupled to the ground (Morey, 1974). The antenna is
moved across the measurement surface along the line of the survey. The transmitted radar
signals are reflected from various subsurface interfaces in response to contrasts in the
dielectric properties of the subsurface materials and are received back at the transmitting
antenna where the signal is processed. The method is capable of producing a high quality
graphic profile at speeds of up to several kilometers per hour. GPR can resolve subsurface
conditions on the order of centimeters. Commonly, a printed record of the survey run is
produced in the field so that the applicability of the method to a particular site is quickly
determined. Interpretation skills of the operator are critical in obtaining reliable data.
GPR has been used to profile both the water table and the overburden/bedrock
interface, to locate buried objects including storage tanks and utilities, and to identify voids
and areas of soil subsidence; GPR also has had considerable utility in mine applications.
Beres and Haeni (1991) provide results of the application of GPR to stratified drift deposits in
Connecticut.
The depth of radar signal penetration is highly site-specific and dependent on the
electrical conductivity properties of subsurface soil and rock. Morey (1974) reported
penetration depth of greater than 75 feet in water-saturated sand and 230 feet in an Antarctic
ice shelf. Fountain (1976) states that this method has shown detection capacity only to depths
of approximately 2.4 meters in moist, clay-rich soils. If the specific conductance of the pore
fluid is sufficiently low, however, data can commonly be obtained to a depth of 3 to 10
meters in saturated materials (Dobecki and Romig, 1985). Electrically conductive subsurface
materials such as wet clay, sea water, or extensively micaceous materials with high dielectric
permittivity properties can significantly attenuate radar signals. Signal attenuation for a
particular material is also dependent on the frequency of the radar pulse. In general, good
results can be obtained in dry, sandy, rocky areas.
The continuous nature of GPR offers a number of advantages over many other
geophysical methods and allows for a substantial increase in the detail obtained along a
traverse line. Additionally, the high speed of data acquisition permits many lines to be run
across a site, and in some cases, total site coverage is economically feasible (Benson et al.,
1982). The method is limited by the attenuative properties of many subsurface materials, by
November 1992
4-27
-------
the radar signal, and by the highly site-specific application of the technique. Multiple
reflections can complicate data interpretation.
Electromagnetic (EM) Induction-Conductivity
The electromagnetic (EM) induction method uses alternating electric currents flowing
between a transmitter and a receiver coil to induce secondary magnetic fields in the
subsurface that are linearly proportional to ground conductivity up to approximately 100
mmhos/m (McNeill, 1980). The instrument reading is a bulk measurement of the apparent
formation conductivity calculated as the cumulative response to subsurface conditions ranging
from the ground surface to the effective depth of the instrument. The effective exploration
depths for commercially available equipment range from 3 to 60 meters depending on the
instrument orientation and the intercoil spacing. The EM technique has been applied to
mapping geologic deposits, locating subsurface cavities in karst environments, locating
subsurface trenches, mapping contaminant plumes, locating metallic conductors, mapping
saltwater intrusion, and locating buried drums, tanks, and subsurface utilities. By changing
the orientation and spacing of EM coils, it is possible to profile vertical changes in subsurface
conductivity, potentially allowing for vertical tracking of contaminant plumes. Like other
geophysical techniques, delineation of a particular subsurface feature from the bulk apparent
conductivity measurement requires a sufficient conductivity contrast in the subsurface.
When dry, soil and rock typically have low conductivities. In some areas, conductive
minerals like magnetite, graphite, and pyrite occur in sufficient concentrations to greatly
increase natural subsurface conductivity. Most often, conductivity is overwhelmingly
influenced by water content and by the following soil and rock parameters:
The porosity and permeability of the materials;
The extent to which the pore space is saturated;
The concentration of dissolved electrolytes and colloids in the pore fluids; and,
The temperature and phase state (i.e., liquid or ice) of the pore water.
In some cases, contaminants increase the electrolyte and colloid content of the
unsaturated and saturated zones. Examples of common ionic contaminants include chloride,
sulfates, the nitrogen series, and metals such as sodium, iron, and manganese. With the
addition of electrolytes and/or colloids, the ground conductivity can be affected, sometimes
increasing by one to three orders of magnitude above background values. However, if the
natural variations in subsurface conductivity are low, conductivity variations of only 10 to 20
percent above background may be observed.
November 1992
4-28
-------
Interferences due to overhead power lines, known subsurface utilities, and metal
objects such as fences, above-ground oil tanks, and cars are noted when conducting an EM
survey. Readings obtained in the vicinity of such instrument interferences are either
discarded or regarded as suspect during the interpretation of the data. In areas of large power
lines, instrument overloading can occur. To ensure that measurements are consistent and that
instrumental overloading is not present, readings are typically obtained at two different
sensitivity scales in areas of such interferences. The survey also may be operated
perpendicular rather than parallel to linear sources.
Gravity Methods
Gravity measurements are useful for estimating depth to bedrock, for locating voids
and fault zones, for estimating the ground-water volume in alluvial basins (Hinze, 1988). The
observed density contrasts between rock, air, water, and soil make gravity measurements a
useful mapping tool. A low value of gravity indicates an anomalously low density subsurface
mass, which might be due to a subsurface void, a cavity in rock filled with lighter density
material, a thickening of the soil layer overlying bedrock, a decrease in soil density, or a
variation of ground-water volume (Hinze, 1988). Gravity measurements alone are not
sufficient to uniquely determine the cause of a gravity anomaly; however, an experienced
interpreter can often define the source of the anomaly when gravity methods are used in
conjunction with knowledge of the local geologic setting and a soil/rock boring program.
4.2.5.2 Borehole Geophysical Techniques
Borehole geophysical logging is used to obtain continuous vertical profiles of
subsurface conditions at resolutions that cannot be obtained economically from the physical
drilling, sampling, and testing of subsurface formations. Borehole geophysical methods
measure the responses of subsurface rock, soils, and fluids to various logging tools and utilize
the measurements to ascertain physical characteristics of the subsurface formations and their
contained fluids. Available logging tools include electrical, visual, thermal, acoustic (sonic),
magnetic, nuclear (radioactive), fiber optic, and mechanical sensors. Some tools that are
available to measure the physical properties of the borehole include borehole calipers,
borehole deviation surveying tools, temperature measurement tools, and downhole video
surveying cameras. Borehole geophysical measurements can be obtained in open boreholes or
cased wells, however all tools are not functional in both environments. Generally only
nuclear and sonic tools are applied to cased hole logging. In either instance, the application
of a specific tool to a borehole or cased well may require that the borehole or well be fluid-
filled and that the composition or clarity of the fluid be constrained within the tool's limits
for optimum performance.
Borehole geophysical logs can be utilized to correlate formation properties between
boreholes and to refine surface geophysical interpretations. Geophysical logs obtained with
equipment that is properly calibrated and standardized can provide objective and consistent
November 1992
4-29
-------
data that can be used in: the interpretation of stratigraphy, thickness, and extent of aquifers
and confining units; relative permeability, porosity, bulk density, resistivity, moisture content,
and specific yield of aquifers and confining layers; borehole deviation; casing integrity;
subsurface temperature; formation-resistivity factors; and the source, movement, and
chemical/physical nature of ground water (Keys, 1988). Sources of information on the use
and interpretation of geophysical logs include Keys (1988); Keys and MacCary (1971); Labo
(1986); Telford et al. (1976); Ellis (1987); Schlumberger (1989); and Taylor et al. (1990).
In many instances, different tools (such as radioactive or sonic tools) are used to
determine the same formation property (such as porosity) by measuring the response of the
formation to the specific tool. The electrode, coil, transmitter/receiver, or source/detector
spacings of the method used reflect the properties of the formation by integrating the data
gathered over a fixed distance as a function of the source/detector spacings. These spacings
vary the depth of investigation of a particular tool into an unaltered formation. Factors such
as these emphasize the importance of having knowledgeable and experienced operators obtain
borehole geophysical logs and having qualified log analysts interpret the data.
Downhole measurements are recorded in the field using portable field equipment or
(more routinely) a service company logging truck. The service company logging truck
generally provides all downhole measurement tools, electrical cables, a winch, and extensive
truck-mounted surface instrumentation for controlling tool operations and acquiring response
data. Office processing of the log data may include making corrections for borehole
conditions, mud cake, and tool standoff, and calculating formation mechanical properties,
permeability, or mineralogy. Variations in the physical environment where the geophysical
sondes operate make it necessary to correct the measured values for the borehole effects.
Corrections commonly applied to the measured data include compensation for borehole
diameter, sonde eccentricity, drilling fluid invasion, bed thickness, and mudcake formation.
By the nature of the tool design, many modern logging tools are dual-detector, compensating
devices that provide a large degree of correction for the borehole environment.
Electrical Methods
Electrical logging methods that are applicable to the borehole environment include
resistivity/conductivity and spontaneous potential measurements. Borehole resistivity and
conductivity methods are analogous to surface resistivity/conductivity techniques in that the
measurements are obtained using fixed-spaced electrodes or coils, and electrical currents are
passed through the formation across the fixed-spaced electrodes or transmitter/receiver arrays.
The voltage is measured between the electrodes and is proportional to the formation
resistivity. Because of the need for electrical coupling among the tool electrodes, borehole
fluid, and formation, electrical resistivity curves are obtained from uncased boreholes. The
November 1992
4-30
-------
induction log, used to measure formation conductivity, is generally applicable to boreholes
drilled with moderate to non-conductive drilling fluids and to empty or air-drilled boreholes.
Downhole electrical resistivity/induction surveys are run to provide data for the
evaluation of drilling mud invasion, to determine true formation resistivity/conductivity and
flushed zone resistivity, to determine pore water resistivity/conductivity, and to potentially
provide a means for correlation across wells. Resistivity data also are used in conjunction
with other log measurements to estimate permeability and in situ mineralogy. Applicability
of a particular resistivity or induction tool to a specific borehole environment is a function of
the formation electrical properties, the properties of the borehole fluid, and the desired
resolution of the survey. In general, a wide array of electrode and coil configurations are
available for borehole applications. The development of focused, multiple-electrode resistivity
and multi-coil induction sondes have improved the vertical resolution and depth of penetration
of electrical tools.
The spontaneous potential (SP) tool records the electrical potential produced by the
interaction between formation pore water, conductive drilling fluid, and ion-selective
formation components. The SP curve can potentially differentiate between porous and
permeable zones and non-porous, impermeable zones, and can define layer boundaries and
estimate ground-water resistivity. However, the SP curve cannot be recorded in boreholes
filled with non-conductive drilling fluids or cased boreholes because the fluid does not
provide electrical continuity between the SP electrode and the formation. Similarly, if the
borehole fluid filtrate in the formation and the natural formation water have approximately
equal resistivities, the SP curve deflections will be small and the curve will appear featureless.
Electrical noise and anomalous potentials are common problems on SP logs, a result of
insufficient electrical insulation of the steel cables used to lower the SP electrodes into a
borehole. Surface or subsurface electrical sources, and weather effects also are possible
sources of anomalous potentials.
Nuclear Methods
Nuclear radiation tools are used to measure passive or induced radiations from the
nuclei of the atoms comprising a formation. Commonly applied nuclear tools are the natural
gamma ray, gamma-gamma, and neutron devices that can be applied in either cased or open
boreholes filled with any type of fluid.
Conventional gamma ray logging is a passive process that uses a sonde containing a
scintillation counter to measure the total natural radioactivity emitted by the formation. The
measured total radioactivity is a linear combination of source radiation from potassium,
thorium, and uranium-bearing formation elements. Natural Gamma Ray Spectrometry (NGS)
logging is a refinement of conventional gamma ray logging that uses five window (energy
levels) spectroscopy to resolve the total natural gamma ray spectra into the potassium,
thorium, and uranium components. The tool has a sodium iodide scintillation detector to
November 1992
4-31
-------
measure the number and energy level of detected gamma rays and uses the data to calculate
the concentrations of each component.
Gamma-gamma logs record the intensity of gamma radiation at the tool detectors
resulting from the backscattering and attenuation of gamma radiation emitted by the tool
source. The primary use of the gamma-gamma tool is for the identification of lithology and
for the measurement of the bulk density of the formation. The modern gamma-gamma log
records the bulk density of the measured formation using a compensating, skid-mounted,
borehole sidewall device that contains a gamma ray source and two detectors. The instrument
skid is pressed against the borehole sidewall by a spring activated arm with sufficient force to
cut through soft mudcakes. The density sonde measures the formation's ability to attenuate
gamma rays emitted from the tool's radioactive source by measuring the number of scattered
gamma rays reaching the detectors. The number of scatterings is related to the number of
electrons in the formation, therefore, the response of the tool is determined by the electron
density of the formation. The electron density is related to the true bulk density of the
formation. The bulk density information is used to provide a measure of the formation
density and to calculate the formation porosity. More advanced density tools, in addition to
providing measurement of formation density, record low energy gamma rays in the domain of
photoelectric absorption. By comparing the number of gamma rays detected in each domain,
these density tools can determine a photoelectric absorption cross section index, Pe. The Pe
value is primarily a function of the formation mineralogy and is used to estimate the in situ
mineralogic composition of the formation. The depth of penetration of the density tool is
approximately 4 feet with vertical resolution ranging from 1.5 to 3 feet, depending on the
logging speed. Instruments of lesser quality may obtain penetration depths of only 6 inches.
Neutron logging is one of several methods used to derive porosity values for
subsurface formations. The neutron log response is a function of the hydrogen content of the
borehole environment and is used for the measurement of moisture content above the water
table and of total porosity below the water table. A modern, compensated neutron tool uses
an americium-beryllium radioactive source (3-16 curies) to generate high energy neutrons that
interact with the formation. The sonde is a dual-spaced device with two sets of thermal
neutron detectors, near and far. The tool compensation resulting from the dual-detector
arrangement reduces the effects of borehole conditions by using the ratio of two counting
rates similarly affected by the environment. As the neutrons are attenuated or rebounded
from the formation, the tool detects and counts neutrons in the thermal energy regime. The
ratio of the counting rates from the two detectors is processed by the surface equipment to
produce a linearly scaled measure of the neutron porosity index.
The response of the neutron tool is affected by formation elements having high
thermal neutron capture cross sections (elements having higher probabilities of capturing
thermal neutrons) that act to moderate (attenuate) neutrons in the formation. Hydrogen,
boron, and chlorine are particularly effective. Reduced counting rates as a result of neutron
attenuation by an element result in poorer counting statistics and unrealistically higher
November 1992
4-32
-------
measured porosity values. Thermal neutron measurements also may be influenced by the
presence of hydrogen or chlorine bound in the lattice structures of clay minerals, micas, and
other hydrogen/chlorine bearing minerals. A thermal-epithermal neutron tool is a dual
compensated, dual porosity tool that detects interacted neutrons in the thermal and (higher
energy) epithermal ranges. Because of the higher (epithermal) neutron energy levels, the
impacts of this tool include significantly improved neutron counting statistics in the
epithermal range, and less affected porosity values by neutron attenuators. The vertical
resolution of the neutron tool is approximately 2 feet with processing enhancement possible to
1 foot. The depth of investigation of the tool is a function of porosity and typically is in the
range of 10 to 12 inches.
Limitations associated with nuclear logging methods are related to the correction of
the logs for borehole parameters in the absence of tool compensation, the need to handle and
operate devices containing radioactive source material in an underground environment, and
the effects of radiation moderators in the borehole environment. Additionally, formation
porosities derived from gamma-gamma and neutron measurements are dependent on
knowledge of the formation matrix density (not bulk density) which in many cases is
estimated in the absence of physical measurements. In formations where the matrix density is
significantly different from the response density utilized by the tool operator, the calculated
porosity may be in error. This is known as the matrix effect.
Sonic Methods
The sonic log is a recording of the transit time of an acoustic pulse through a
formation between a series of acoustic transmitters and receivers in a sonic probe as a
function of depth in a borehole. Application of the sonic tool in a borehole is analogous to
the surface seismic geophysical technique. Many of the tools commonly used for engineering
or ground-water investigations are simple devices capable of providing detailed compressional
and shear wave velocity measurements. Multiple transmitter-receiver sonic tools are available
for larger-scale applications and provide greater vertical resolution of the formation and
enhanced delineation of the sonic waveform at later arrival times along the wavetrain. Full
wavetrain recording allows for extraction of information from the deeper sections of the
waveform such as the delineation of stonely wave arrivals. The measured interval travel
times (usec/ft) are functions of the transmitter to receiver distances and the competence of the
measured formation. Computations using sonic interval transit times (compressional and
shear) are used to calculate porosity, formation dynamic elastic moduli, compressibilities
(bulk, rock), poisson's ratio, tensile strength, fracture pressure, and minimum horizontal stress.
Sonic log measurements are commonly obtained in open, fluid-filled boreholes,
although cased hole measurements are used to evaluate cement bond integrity. In instances
where the cement bond between the formation and casing is adequately high, the sonic log
may be used to evaluate formation properties through the casing (Keys and MacCary, 1971).
November 1992
4-33
-------
Advanced sonic log tools are capable of providing high resolution borehole caliper
measurements and full borehole imagery. Borehole televiewer surveys are capable of taking
high resolution acoustic pictures of the walls of fluid-filled boreholes. The televiewer allows
identification of fractures and fracture orientation, deformation, pitting, vugs, bedding planes,
lithology changes, and well casing and screen integrity. Limitations of sonic logging are
related both to signal attenuation as a result of borehole environmental or tool factors, and to
variability in formation properties affecting the elastic wave transmission and attenuation.
The previously discussed "matrix effect" is applicable to the interpretation of sonic data.
Physical Methods
Physical methods of subsurface investigation include caliper, temperature, borehole
deviation, and downhole video surveying. Caliper surveys are commonly run in combination
with the other tools and are used to apply borehole corrections to the measured log data.
Caliper surveys also are valuable in delineating enlarged borehole zones that may be
indicative of subsurface fracturing, karstification/solution channels, or water-bearing zones.
High resolution, multi-arm caliper devices can provide valuable information regarding the
borehole geometry and directional aspects of borehole enlargement. Caliper devices range in
resolution from single-arm tools measuring the borehole diameter in a single direction, to
multi-arm tools measuring the hole diameter in several simultaneous directions.
A temperature log is obtained by lowering a temperature sonde into a fluid filled
borehole at a constant rate. The probe is constructed so that borehole fluid flows by a
temperature sensor on the probe. Temperature is recorded as a function of depth. A
temperature log can provide information on the temperature variation with depth and can
provide a measure of the thermal gradient. The log is commonly run in open hole
environments although cased hole applications are common, particularly for locating cement
grout behind a casing or for confirming fluid flow in perforated intervals. Temperature
anomalies in open boreholes may be indicators of permeable zones reflecting the movement
of cooler, unequilibrated water into a warmer, equilibrated borehole environment.
Borehole geometry and deviation are determined from high resolution microresistivity
measurements obtained using dipmeter or gyroscopic tools. The dipmeter tool uses four dual
electrodes to record eight microconductivity curves and a triaxial accelerometer and three
magnetometers to provide detailed information on borehole microresistivity, tool deviation,
and azimuth. Caliper measurements are obtained at 90 degree intervals for input to borehole
geometry and volume calculations. Borehole video surveys are a valuable means of visually
assessing downhole conditions in stable, open holes and in cased wells. Completion of a
successful video survey is contingent on the clarity of the fluid filling the borehole or well.
November 1992
4-34
-------
4.2.5.3 Surface to Borehole, Cross Borehole Geophysical Methods
Surface to borehole and cross borehole geophysical methods combine the use of
electrodes or geophones in boreholes with surface electrodes or sources to affect surface to
borehole and cross borehole measurements (Dobecki and Romig, 1985). Application of both
surface and borehole geophysical techniques increases the resolution of targets because
borehole probes can be positioned close to the target of interest (Van Nostrand and Cook,
1966). Geophysical techniques applied within and between boreholes include vertical seismic
profiling, geotomography (utilizing both seismic and EM waves) and DC resistivity. Cross
borehole EM techniques have been used by Lytle et al. (1979, 1981) to locate high-contrast
electrical anomalies (e.g., tunnels) and to monitor the direction and flow rate of injected
fluids. Butler and Curro (1981) have described cross borehole procedures for obtaining
accurate seismic velocity profiles.
Cross borehole and surface to borehole methods provide a greater lateral radius of
investigation than can be achieved through single borehole logging, thereby providing
measurement over a larger formation volume. The region surveyed is a path between the
energy source and the detector, but it is not necessarily the straight line path between the two
points. The probability that the sampled region is along a straight line path between the
source and detector increases as the distance between the source and detector decreases. The
surface to borehole and cross borehole techniques are limited by many of the factors affecting
most geophysical surveys such as non-uniqueness of results, and therefore, require other
integrated data for verification of results.
4.3 Characterizing Ground-Water Flow Beneath the Site
In addition to characterizing site geology, the owner/operator should characterize the
hydrology of the uppermost aquifer and its confining layer(s) at the site. The owner or
operator should install wells and/or piezometers to assist in characterizing site hydrology.
The owner/operator should determine and assess:
The direction(s) and rate(s) of ground-water flow (including both horizontal
and vertical components of flow);
Seasonal/temporal, natural, and artificially induced (e.g., off-site production
well pumping, agricultural use) short-term and long-term variations in ground-
water elevations and flow patterns; and
The hydraulic conductivities of the stratigraphic units at the site, including
vertical hydraulic conductivity of the confining layer(s).
Section 4.3.1 provides a brief introduction to ground-water flow in porous media and
conduits; Section 4.3.2 provides a discussion of the Agency's definition of "uppermost
November 1992
4-35
-------
aquifer"; Section 4.3.3 discusses methods for determining ground-water flow direction and
hydraulic gradient; Section 4.3.4 discusses methods for determining hydraulic conductivity;
and Section 4.3.5 discusses determining ground-water flow rate. The special case of ground-
water flow in aquifers dominated by conduit flow is discussed in Sections 4.3.1 and 5.2.
Most of the discussions provided in Sections 4.3.3, 4.3.4, and 4.3.5 do not apply to this
special case.
4.3.1 Introduction
Conventional ground-water hydrology considers aquifers to be porous granular media
(either unconsolidated granular deposits or rock) having a well-defined water table or
potentiometric surface. The flow of ground water in these types of aquifers is described by
Darcy's law:
Q = -KiA
where:
Q = quantity of flow per unit of time, in (volume/time)
K = hydraulic conductivity, in (length/time)
i = hydraulic gradient, in (length/length)
A = cross-sectional area through which the flow occurs, in (length2)
Darcy's law assumes laminar flow of individual particles of water moving parallel to
the direction of flow, with no mixing or transverse component in their motion. The right-
hand side of the Darcy equation is preceded by a negative sign because ground water flows
from high head to low head.
There are two types of ground-water systems where the relationship expressed by
Darcy's law does not apply. These are systems where ground water flows through materials
with low hydraulic conductivities under extremely low gradients, and systems in which a
large amount of flow passes through materials with very high hydraulic conductivities
(turbulent flow). These two situations can be considered, respectively, as the lower and upper
limits of the validity of Darcy's law (Freeze and Cherry, 1979).
The Reynolds number (the ratio of inertial to viscous fluid forces) is a dimensionless
number used to define the limits of the validity of Darcy's law. The Reynolds number (Re) is
defined as:
p v d
R
e
November 1992
4-36
-------
where:
p = fluid density, in (mass/length3)
|i = fluid viscosity, in (mass/length-time)
v = specific discharge, in (length/time)
d = some characteristic dimension of the system, often represented
by the average grain size diameter.
The range of the Reynolds numbers over which Darcy's law is valid depends on the
definition of "d," or diameter of the passageway through which the ground water moves.
When "d" is approximated as average grain size diameter, Darcy's law is only valid for
Reynolds numbers in the range of 1 to 10.
The basic hydraulic principles governing flow through porous media are not applicable
to aquifers where ground-water flow is primarily through conduits. Flow through caves
(conduits that can be entered at the earth's surface) and conduits is referred to as conduit
flow. Most conduit flow is turbulent, is analogous to the flow of surface streams, and
resurfaces at a spring or group of springs. Water quality in these springs is usually
representative of the mean water quality of the ground-water basin. Aquifers in which
subsurface conduits dominate the flow regime are described in terms of their drainage pattern
rather than by the concept of a water table; these drainage patterns are usually a network of
smaller conduits that contribute their flow to the larger "trunk" conduits. The prediction of
flow paths in such aquifers is not usually possible from wells alone, unlike other aquifers.
Ground-water flow in conduits of karst aquifers differs radically from flow in porous
media. Velocities on the order of hundreds of feet per hour may occur in conduits (Quinlan,
1990). Thus, the effects of a release of hazardous material on water quality in an aquifer
dominated by conduit flow can commonly be detected at great distances in less than a day.
In addition, water levels in these aquifers can commonly change rapidly and substantially in
response to heavy rains. Observation wells that intercept conduits in the Mammoth Cave area
of Kentucky typically have water-level fluctuations of 60 to 80 feet and at times exceed 100
feet or more.
"Diffuse flow" is a term applied to aquifers in which ground-water flow is
predominantly through poorly integrated pores, joints, and tubes. Diffuse flow is intermediate
between flow through fractures and conduits, and flow through porous media. Ground-water
flow in aquifers in which diffuse flow predominates is generally laminar and can be described
by Darcy's law (Quinlan, 1989). Many springs in karst terranes are fed by a mixture of both
diffuse and conduit flow, and, in a given region, some springs can be fed by primarily
conduit-flow systems, while other nearby springs can be fed by primarily diffuse-flow
systems. Although conduit flow is turbulent by definition (and as such, is not described by
Darcy's law), a spring fed by a diffuse-flow system may discharge from a conduit and may
have turbulent flow. This is particularly true in structurally and stratigraphically complex
November 1992
4-37
-------
areas, such as the karst terrane described in a study by Shuster and White (1971). Quinlan
(1990) discusses the differences between conduit and diffuse flow and provides a relatively
simple method for distinguishing between a conduit flow spring and a diffuse flow spring.
Karst ground-water systems developed in both younger limestones, such as those in
Puerto Rico and Florida, and in older limestones, such as those in the Appalachians, the
Ozarks, and the Kentucky-Indiana karst region, may be either conduit-flow or diffuse flow.
Younger limestones, however, may have significant primary porosity, so that they can be
likened to a gigantic sponge in which flow occurs throughout the entire aquifer through huge
pores rather than being constrained in conduits. Consequently, the type of flow found in
some younger, highly porous limestones may be rapid and turbulent — not the slow, linear
flow described by Darcy's law.
In the United States, lava tubes and caves occur in areas of great thicknesses of
basaltic lava flows (Hawaii and the Columbia Plateau and Snake River Plain of the Pacific
Northwest), but conduit flow rarely is present.
4.3.2 Definition of the "Uppermost Aquifer"
The owner/operator is required under 40 CFR §264.97 to install a ground-water
monitoring system that yields representative samples from the uppermost aquifer beneath the
facility. The ground-water monitoring system should allow for the detection of contamination
when hazardous waste or hazardous constituents have migrated from the waste management
area to the uppermost aquifer. Owners and operators should properly identify the uppermost
aquifer when establishing a ground-water monitoring system that meets the requirements of
§264.97. EPA has defined the uppermost aquifer as the geologic formation nearest the
ground surface that is an aquifer, as well as lower aquifers that are hydraulically connected
within the facility's property boundary. "Aquifer" is defined as the geologic formation, group
of formations, or part of a formation that is capable of yielding a significant amount of
ground water to wells or springs (40 CFR §260.10). The identification of the confining layer
or lower boundary is an essential facet of the definition of uppermost aquifer. Interconnected
zones of saturation below an aquifer that are capable of yielding significant amounts of water
also comprise the uppermost aquifer. Quality and use of ground water are not factors in the
definition. Even though a saturated zone may not be presently in use, or may contain water
not suitable for human consumption, it should be monitored if it is part of the uppermost
aquifer to ensure that the performance standard of §264.97(a)(3) is met. Identification of
formations capable of "significant yield" is made on a case-by-case basis.
There are saturated zones, such as low permeability clays, that do not yield a
significant amount of water, yet act as pathways for contamination that can migrate
horizontally for some distance before reaching a zone that yields a significant amount of
water. If there are hydrogeologic data supporting the belief that potential exists for
contamination to migrate along such pathways, the Regional Administrator may invoke the
November 1992
4-38
-------
authorities of §264.97 to require such zones to be monitored. In addition, the Regional
Administrator may require the use of supplemental monitoring wells in conjunction with point
of compliance wells to monitor sites where hydrogeologic conditions or contaminant
characteristics allow contaminants to move past or away from the point of compliance without
being detected (§264.97(a)(3)). The Agency recommends the use of unsaturated zone
monitoring where it would aid in detecting early migration of contaminants into ground water.
In determining the necessity for and scope of unsaturated zone monitoring, the Regional
Administrator will consider site specific factors that include geologic and hydrogeologic
characteristics.
Other authorities that can be used to require monitoring include §3004(u) for
corrective action for permitting; the "omnibus" permitting authority under §3005(c)(3) of
RCRA and 40 CFR §270.32(b) that mandates permit conditions to protect human health and
the environment; and §3013 authority that authorizes the Agency to require monitoring,
testing, analyses, and reporting in certain circumstances upon a finding of a substantial
hazard. If a release to ground water is detected, the release should be characterized in all
saturated zones regardless of yield.
The owner/operator should assess hydraulic connection between zones of saturation
yielding significant amounts of water, and properly define potential zones of contaminant
migration. The owner/operator also should be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
EPA Regional Administrator (e.g., through the use of aquifer testing and/or modeling) that the
units identified as the confining units below the uppermost aquifer are of sufficiently low
permeability to minimize the passage of contaminants to saturated, stratigraphically lower
units. Owners and operators should be aware that true confining layers rarely exist. Facies
changes are the rule, and not the exception at most sites, and may preclude the existence of a
confining layer. Furthermore, particularly with regard to DNAPLs, a confining layer may not
inhibit flow laterally downdip of the layer. Solvents also have been shown to interact with
clays, causing dessication and the formation of fractures. Consequently, even if the confining
layer is continuous (it usually is not), the confining layer may not prevent contaminant
migration.
4.3.3 Determining Ground-Water Flow Direction and Hydraulic Gradient
Installing monitoring wells that will provide representative background and
downgradient water samples requires a thorough understanding of how ground water flows
beneath a site. Developing such an understanding requires obtaining information regarding
both ground-water flow direction(s) and hydraulic gradient. Ground-water flow direction can
be thought of as the idealized path that particles of ground water follow as they pass through
the subsurface. Hydraulic gradient (i) is the change in static head per unit of distance in a
given direction. The static head is defined as the height above a standard datum of the
surface of a column of water (or other liquid) that can be supported by the static pressure at a
given point (i.e., the sum of the elevation head and pressure head).
November 1992
4-39
-------
To determine ground-water flow directions and hydraulic gradient, owners and
operators should develop and implement a water level monitoring program. The water level
monitoring program should be structured to provide precise water level measurements in a
sufficient number of piezometers or wells at a sufficient frequency to gauge both seasonal
average flow directions and temporal fluctuations in ground-water flow directions
(§264.97(f)). Ground-water flow direction(s) should be determined from water levels
measured in wells screened in the same hydrostratigraphic position. In heterogeneous
geologic settings (i.e., settings in which the hydraulic conductivities of the subsurface
materials vary with location in the subsurface), long well screens can intercept stratigraphic
horizons with different (e.g., contrasting) ground-water flow directions and different heads. In
this situation, the resulting water levels will not provide the depth-discrete head measurements
required for accurate determination of the ground-water flow direction.
In addition to evaluating the component of ground-water flow in the horizontal
direction, a program should be undertaken to accurately and directly assess the vertical
component of ground-water flow. Vertical ground-water flow information should be based at
least in part on field data from wells and piezometers such as multi-level wells, piezometer
clusters, or multi-level sampling devices, where appropriate. The following sections provide
acceptable methods for assessing the vertical and horizontal components of flow at a site.
4.3.3.1 Ground-Water Level Measurements
To determine ground-water flow directions and ground-water flow rates, accurate
water level measurements (measured to the nearest 0.01 foot) should be obtained.
Procedures for obtaining water level measurements are presented in Section 7.2.2. At
facilities where it is known or plausible that immiscible contaminants (i.e., light non-aqueous
phase liquids (LNAPLs) or DNAPLs) occur (or are determined to potentially occur after
considering the waste types managed at the facility) in the subsurface at the facility, both the
depth(s) to the immiscible layer(s) and the thickness(es) of the immiscible layer(s) in the well
should be recorded. Section 7.2.3 provides procedures for measuring the thickness of
immiscible layers in wells.
If accurate documentation cannot be produced to show that the procedures for well
surveying contained in Section 6.6, water level elevation measurements contained in Section
7.2.2, and detection of immiscible layers contained in Section 7.2.3 were met during the
collection of water level measurements, the information generated may be judged inadequate.
For the purpose of measuring total head, piezometers and wells should have as short a
screened interval as possible. Specifically, EPA recommends that the screens in piezometers
or wells that are used to measure head be less than 10 feet long. In circumstances including,
but not limited to the following, well screens longer than 10 feet may be warranted:
November 1992
4-40
-------
Natural water level fluctuations necessitate a longer screen length;
The interval monitored is slightly greater than the appropriate screen length
(e.g., the interval monitored is 12 feet thick); or
The aquifer monitored is homogeneous and extremely thick (e.g., greater than
300 feet), thus a longer screen (e.g., a 20-foot screen) represents a fairly
discrete interval.
The head measured in a well with a long screened interval is a function of all of the different
heads over the entire length of the screened interval. Care should be taken when interpreting
water levels collected from wells that have long screened intervals (e.g., greater than 10 feet).
Hydrostratigraphic relationships should be determined by a qualified ground-water
scientist when obtaining and evaluating water level data. Unqualified individuals may
confuse a potentiometric surface with the water table in areas where both confined and
unconfined aquifers exist. In all cases, well or piezometer screen placement should be based
on the detailed boring log, and the well or piezometer screen should not intercept
hydraulically separated zones of saturation.
At sites where the hydraulic gradient is so small that the error introduced by
measuring water levels in crooked or out-of-plumb wells will produce an inaccurate
determination of hydraulic gradient or flow direction, a deviation survey should be performed
on all wells. If a well is out-of-plumb and/or not straight (crooked), the information gathered
from the deviation survey should be used to correct water level elevations measured in the
well. A deviation survey will determine whether the wells are in vertical alignment (i.e.,
straight) and are plumb. Several instruments and methods have been designed for this
purpose; a good description of these instruments and methods is provided by Driscoll (1986).
A proper deviation survey will consider both magnitude of well deviation and direction of
deviation. If a well is out-of-plumb and/or not straight (crooked), the information gathered
from the deviation survey should be used to correct water level elevations measured in the
well, because the depth to ground water measured in an out-of-plumb or crooked well will be
greater than the depth to ground water measured in a straight well. A correction can be
accomplished easily by first graphing the actual vertical configuration of the well, and then by
establishing a relationship between a measured water level elevation in the crooked and/or
out-of-plumb well and the water level elevation in an imaginary straight and plumb well at
the same location. A method for graphing the actual vertical configuration of an out-of-
plumb and/or crooked well is provided by Driscoll (1986).
November 1992
4-41
-------
4.3.3.2 Establishing Horizontal Flow Direction and the Horizontal Component
of Hydraulic Gradient
After the water level data and measurement procedures are reviewed to determine that
they are accurate, the data should be used to:
Construct potentiometric surface maps and water table maps that are based on
the distribution of total head, such as the example in Figure 4. The data used
to develop water table maps should be from piezometers or wells screened
across the water table. The data used to develop potentiometric surface maps
should be from piezometers or wells screened at approximately the same
elevation in the same hydrostratigraphic unit;
Determine the horizontal direction(s) of ground-water flow by drawing flow
lines on the potentiometric surface map or water table map (i.e., construct a
flow net); and
Calculate value(s) for the horizontal and vertical components of hydraulic
gradient.
Methods for constructing potentiometric surface and water table maps, constructing
flow nets, and determining the direction(s) of ground-water flow, are given by USEPA
(1989c) and Freeze and Cherry (1979). Methods for calculating hydraulic gradient are
provided by Heath (1982) and USEPA (1989c).
A potentiometric surface or water table map will give an approximate idea of general
ground-water flow directions; however, to locate monitoring wells properly, ground-water
flow direction(s) and hydraulic gradient(s) should be established in both the horizontal and
vertical directions and over time at regular intervals (e.g., over a one-year period at three-
month intervals).
4.3.3.3 Establishing Vertical Flow Direction and the Vertical Component of
Hydraulic Gradient
To adequately determine the ground-water flow directions, the vertical component of
ground-water flow should be evaluated directly. This generally requires the installation of
multiple piezometers or wells in clusters or nests, or the installation of multi-level wells or
sampling devices. A piezometer or well nest is a closely spaced group of piezometers or
wells screened at different depths, whereas a multi-level well is a single device. Both
piezometer/well nests and multi-level wells allow for the measurement of vertical variations in
hydraulic head. To obtain reliable measurements, the following criteria should be considered
in the evaluation of data from piezometer/well nests and multi-level wells:
November 1992
4-42
-------
UJ
O
(0
o
E
UJ
i
<
S
Ul
X
Ul
FIGURE 4
November 1992
4-43
-------
Data obtained from multiple piezometers or wells placed in a single borehole
may be erroneous. Placement of vertically nested piezometers or wells in
closely-spaced, separate, boreholes, or single multi-level devices in single
boreholes, is preferred.
The vertical component of hydraulic gradient should be calculated, and the
vertical direction of ground-water flow should be determined, for a minimum
of two vertical profiles at the site. These profiles should be aligned roughly
parallel to the horizontal direction of ground-water flow as indicated by the
potentiometric surface or water table map.
All other procedures for water level measurement described in this Manual
should be met.
When reviewing data obtained from multiple placement of piezometers or wells in
single boreholes, the construction details of the well should be carefully evaluated. Not only
is it extremely difficult to adequately seal several piezometers/wells at discrete depths within
a single borehole, but sealant materials may migrate from the seal of one piezometer/well to
the screened interval of another piezometer/well. Therefore, the design of a piezometer/well
nest should be carefully considered. Placement of piezometers/wells in closely-spaced
boreholes, where piezometers/wells have been screened at different, discrete depth intervals, is
likely to produce more accurate information. The primary concerns with the installation of
piezometers/wells in closely-spaced, separate boreholes are: 1) the disturbance of geologic
and soil materials that occurs when one piezometer is installed may be reflected in the data
obtained from another piezometer located nearby, and 2) the analysis of water levels
measured in piezometers that are closely-spaced, but separated horizontally, may produce
imprecise information regarding the vertical component of ground-water flow. The
limitations of installing multiple piezometers either in single or separate boreholes may be
overcome by the installation of single multi-level monitoring wells or sampling devices in
single boreholes. The advantages and disadvantages of these types of devices are discussed
by Aller et al. (1989).
The owner or operator should determine the vertical direction(s) of ground-water flow
using the water levels measured in multi-level wells or piezometer/well nests to construct
flow nets. Flow nets should depict piezometer/well depth and length of the screened interval.
It is important to accurately portray the screened interval on the flow net to ensure that the
piezometer/well is actually monitoring the desired water-bearing unit. A flow net such as that
presented in Figure 5 should be developed from information obtained from piezometer/well
clusters or nests screened at different, discrete depths. Detailed guidance for the construction
and evaluation of flow nets in cross section (vertical flow nets) is provided by USEPA
(1989c). Further information can be obtained from Freeze and Cherry (1979).
November 1992
4-44
-------
ii
i >
* *
(ui) ISH »Aoq« uuiBAaw
o
IT
IS
UJ
u.
o
UJ
E
UJ
o
UI
I
u.
u.
O
UI
UI
FIGURE 5
November 1992
4-45
-------
4.3.3.4 Seasonal and Temporal Factors
The water level monitoring program should be structured to provide precise water
level measurements in a sufficient number of piezometers or wells at a sufficient frequency to
gauge both seasonal average flow directions and temporal fluctuations in ground-water flow
directions (§264.97(f)). The owner/operator should determine and assess seasonal/temporal,
natural, and artificially-induced (e.g., off-site production well pumping, agricultural use) short-
term and long-term variations in ground-water elevations, ground-water flow patterns, and
ground-water quality. Such factors that may influence ground-water elevations and flow
include:
Barometric effects;
Variations in precipitation and runoff/recharge rates;
On-site or off-site well pumping, recharge, and discharge;
Tidal processes or other intermittent natural variations (e.g., river stage);
Off-site or on-site construction, or changing land use patterns;
Off-site or on-site lagoons, ponds, or streams;
Deep well injection;
On-site waste disposal practices; and
Other anthropogenic effects, such as a nearby passing train;
Ground-water flow may exhibit significant seasonal variations. For example, in the
humid eastern regions of the United States, heads are generally highest in late winter or
spring and lowest in late summer or early autumn. However, short-term processes may create
ground-water flow patterns that are markedly different from ground-water flow patterns
determined by seasonal averages. Such processes include changes in river stage, tides, and
storm events.
Changes in land use may affect ground-water flow by altering recharge or discharge
patterns. Examples of such changes in land use patterns include the paving of recharge areas
or damming of waterways. Municipal, industrial, or agricultural off-site or on-site well
pumping may affect both the rate and direction of ground-water flow. On-site and off-site
well pumping may be seasonal, or dependent on more complex water use patterns.
November 1992
4-46
-------
Characterizing seasonal and temporal variations in ground-water flow is important for
site investigations involving aquifer tests. Methods are available for correcting most seasonal
and temporal effects, and they should be considered when designing aquifer tests and
interpreting the results. When determining hydraulic conductivities and other aquifer
parameters using aquifer tests, piezometers/wells should be installed and continuously
monitored during the test outside of the stressed aquifer zone to document and allow
correction for any changes in the potentiometric surface or water table that are not related to
the aquifer test.
4.3.4 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity
Hydraulic conductivity is a measure of a material's ability to transmit water.
Generally, poorly sorted silty or clayey materials have low hydraulic conductivities, whereas
well-sorted sands and gravels have high hydraulic conductivities. An aquifer may be
classified as either homogeneous or heterogeneous and either isotropic or anisotropic
according to the way its hydraulic conductivity varies in space. An aquifer is homogeneous if
the hydraulic conductivity is independent of location within the aquifer; it is heterogeneous if
hydraulic conductivities are dependent on location within the aquifer. If the hydraulic
conductivity is independent of the direction of measurement at a point in a geologic
formation, the formation is isotropic at that point. If the hydraulic conductivity varies with
the direction of measurement at a point, the formation is anisotropic at that point.
In heterogeneous aquifers, owners and operators should determine horizontal hydraulic
conductivity as a function of vertical position in the aquifer. Knowledge of the variation in
hydraulic conductivity as a function of vertical position in the subsurface is essential to
understanding the potential migration of contaminants. Molz et al. (1989) explain that the
common practice of averaging hydraulic conductivity over a vertical interval can mislead
investigators about the dispersive properties of an aquifer. Impeller flowmeters, multilevel
slug tests, or tracer tests may be used to determine hydraulic conductivity with vertical
position in an aquifer (Molz et al., 1990; Molz et al., 1989).
Determining values for hydraulic conductivity as a function of direction of
measurement within an anisotropic saturated zone also is important in evaluating ground-
water flow and contaminant migration. Anisotropy within an aquifer is typically the result of
small-scale stratification (bedding) of sedimentary deposits and/or fractures (Hsieh and
Neuman, 1985; McWhorter and Sunada, 1977). In bedded deposits, hydraulic conductivity in
the direction parallel to bedding is typically (1) the maximum hydraulic conductivity, and (2)
the same magnitude in all directions within planes parallel to the bedding. The magnitude of
hydraulic conductivity is typically smallest in the direction perpendicular to bedding
(McWhorter and Sunada, 1977). Therefore, for the purpose of understanding ground-water
flow and contaminant migration in stratified aquifers, investigators are typically concerned
with determining the ratio of the horizontal component of hydraulic conductivity (Kh) and the
vertical component of hydraulic conductivity (Kv), or Kh:Kv ratio. Way and McKee (1982)
November 1992
4-47
-------
present one method for determining the horizontal and vertical components of hydraulic
conductivity. In fractured media, the principal components of hydraulic conductivity may be
in directions other than horizontal and vertical. Hsieh and Neuman (1985) provide a method
for determining the primary components of hydraulic conductivity in these settings.
4.3.4.1 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity Using Field Methods
Sufficient aquifer testing (i.e., field methods) should be performed to provide
representative estimates of hydraulic conductivity. Acceptable field methods include
conducting aquifer tests with single wells, conducting aquifer tests with multiple wells, and
using flowmeters. This section provides brief overviews of these methods, including two
methods for obtaining vertically-discrete measurements of hydraulic conductivity. Complete
descriptions of the methods summarized in this section are presented in greater detail in the
references provided.
A commonly used test for determining horizontal hydraulic conductivity with a single
well is the slug test. A slug test is performed by suddenly adding, removing, or displacing a
known volume of water from a well and observing the time that it takes for the water level to
recover to its original level (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Similar results can be achieved by
pressurizing the well casing, depressing the water level, and suddenly releasing the pressure to
simulate removal of water from the well. In most cases, EPA recommends that water not be
introduced into wells during aquifer tests to avoid altering ground-water chemistry. Single
well tests are limited in scope to the area directly adjacent to the well screen. The vertical
extent of the well screen generally defines the part of the geologic formation that is being
tested.
The following should be accurately recorded when conducting slug tests: the volume
of the slug added (e.g., plugged stainless steel pipe) or the volume of water removed from the
well; the changing static water elevation (±0.01 inch) prior to, during, and following
completion of the test; and the time elapsed between water level measurements. Tests in
highly permeable materials often require the use of pressure transducers and high speed
recording equipment. The well screen and filter pack adjacent to the interval under
examination should be properly developed either to ensure the removal of fines or to correct
for drilling effects. The interpretation of the single well test data should be consistent with
existing geologic information (e.g., boring log data).
A modified version of the slug test, known as the multilevel slug test, is capable of
providing depth-discrete measurements of hydraulic conductivity. The drawback of the
multilevel slug test is that the test relies on the ability of the investigator to isolate a portion
of the aquifer using a packer. Nevertheless, multilevel slug tests, when performed properly,
can produce reliable measurements of hydraulic conductivity. All equipment necessary for
performing multilevel slug tests is available commercially. The procedure for conducting a
multilevel slug test involves inflating two packers separated by a length of perforated pipe
November 1992
4-48
-------
within the well's screened interval to isolate the desired test region of the aquifer. A slug test
is then performed for the test region of the aquifer by inducing water flow through the
isolated section of the well screen. The slug test data collected can be analyzed by a number
of methods. A multilevel slug test method is described by Molz et al. (1990).
Multiple well tests involve withdrawing water from, or injecting water into, one well,
and obtaining water level measurements over time in observation wells. Multiple well tests
are often performed as pumping tests in which water is pumped from one well and drawdown
is observed in nearby wells. A step-drawdown test should precede most pumping tests to
determine an appropriate discharge rate. Aquifer tests conducted with wells screened in the
same water-bearing zone can be used to provide hydraulic conductivity data for that zone.
Multiple well tests for hydraulic conductivity characterize a greater proportion of the
subsurface than single well tests and thus provide average values of hydraulic conductivity.
Multiple well tests require measurement of parameters similar to those required for single
well tests (e.g., time, drawdown). When using aquifer test data to determine aquifer
parameters, it is important that the solution assumptions can be applied to site conditions.
Aquifer test solutions are available for a wide variety of hydrogeologic settings, but are often
applied incorrectly by inexperienced persons. Incorrect assumptions regarding hydrogeology
(e.g., aquifer boundaries, aquifer lithology, and aquifer thickness) may translate into incorrect
estimations of hydraulic conductivity. A qualified ground-water scientist with experience in
designing and interpreting aquifer tests should be consulted to ensure that aquifer test solution
methods fit the hydrogeologic setting. Kruseman and deRidder (1989) provide a
comprehensive discussion of aquifer tests.
Multiple well tests conducted with wells screened in different water-bearing zones
furnish information concerning hydraulic communication between the zones. For these
aquifer tests, piezometers should be located and screened in permeable, semi-permeable, and
"impermeable" zones. Water levels in these zones should be monitored during the aquifer test
to determine the type of aquifer system (e.g., confined, unconfined, semi-confined, or
semi-unconfined) beneath the site, and their leakance (coefficient of leakage) and drainage
factors (Kruseman and deRidder, 1989). A multiple well aquifer test should be considered at
every site as a method to establish the vertical extent of the uppermost aquifer and to evaluate
hydraulic connection between aquifers.
Certain aquifer tests are inappropriate for use in karst terranes characterized by a
well-developed conduit flow system, and they also may be inappropriate in fractured bedrock.
When a well that is located in a karst conduit or a large fracture is pumped, the water level in
the conduits is lowered. This lowering produces a drawdown that is not radial (as in a
granular aquifer), but is instead a trough-like depression that is parallel to the pumped conduit
or fracture. Radial flow equations do not apply to drawdown data collected during such a
pump test. This means that a conventional semi-log plot of drawdown versus time is
inappropriate for the purpose of determining the aquifer's transmissivity and storativity.
Aquifer tests in karst aquifers can be useful, but valid determinations of hydraulic
November 1992
4-49
-------
conductivity, storativity, and transmissivity may be impossible. However, an aquifer test can
provide information on the presence of conduits, on storage characteristics, and on the
percentage of Darcian flow. McGlew and Thomas (1984) provide a more detailed discussion
of the appropriate use of aquifer tests in fractured bedrock, and the suitable interpretation of
test data. Dye tracing also is used to determine the rate and direction of ground-water flow in
karst settings (Section 5.2.4).
Several additional factors should be considered when planning an aquifer test:
Owners and operators should provide for the proper storage and disposal of
potentially contaminated ground water pumped from the well system;
Owners and operators should consider the potential effects of pumping on
existing plumes of contaminated ground water;
In designing aquifer tests and interpreting aquifer test data, owners/operators
should account and correct for seasonal, temporal, and anthropogenic effects on
the potentiometric surface or water table. This is usually done by installing
piezometers outside the influence of the stressed aquifer. These piezometers
should be continuously monitored during the aquifer test. It may be necessary
to correct for anomalies when evaluating the aquifer test data. A qualified
ground-water scientist could recommend several methods for this, many of
which are presented by Kruseman and deRidder (1989); and
EPA recommends the use of a step-drawdown test to provide a basis for
selecting discharge rates prior to conducting a full-scale pumping test. This
will ensure that the pumping rate chosen for the subsequent pump test(s) can
be sustained without exceeding the available drawdown of the pumped wells,
and will produce a measurable drawdown in the observation wells.
Certain flowmeters have recently been recognized for their ability to provide accurate
and vertically discrete measurements of hydraulic conductivity. One of these, the impeller
flowmeter, is currently available commercially; more sensitive types of flowmeters (i.e., the
heat-pulse flowmeter and electromagnetic flowmeters) should be available in the near future.
Use of the impeller flowmeter requires running a caliper log to measure the uniformity of the
diameter of the well screen. The well is then pumped with a small pump operated at a
constant flow rate. The flowmeter is lowered into the well and the discharge rate is measured
every few feet by raising the flowmeter in the well. Hydraulic conductivity values can be
calculated from the recorded data using the Cooper-Jacob (1946) formula for horizontal flow
to a well. Use of the impeller flowmeter is limited at sites where the presence of low
permeability materials does not allow pumping of the wells at rates sufficient to operate the
flowmeter. The applications of flowmeters in the measure of hydraulic conductivity is
described by Molz et al. (1990) and Molz et al. (1989).
November 1992
4-50
-------
4.3.4.2 Determining Hydraulic Conductivity Using Laboratory Methods
It may be beneficial to use laboratory measurements of hydraulic conductivity to
augment results of field tests; however, field methods provide the best estimate of hydraulic
conductivity in most cases. Because of the limited sample size, laboratory tests can miss
secondary porosity features such as fractures and joints, and hence, can greatly underestimate
overall aquifer hydraulic conductivities. Laboratory tests may provide valuable information
about the vertical component of hydraulic conductivity of aquifer materials. However,
laboratory test results always should be confirmed by field measurements, which sample a
much larger portion of the aquifer. In addition, laboratory test results can be profoundly
affected by the test method selected and by the manner in which the tests are carried out
(e.g., the extent to which sample collection and preparation have changed the in situ hydraulic
properties of the tested material). Special attention should be given to the selection of the
appropriate test method and test conditions, and to quality control of laboratory results.
McWhorter and Sunada (1977), Freeze and Cherry (1979), and Sevee (1991) discuss
determining hydraulic conductivity in the laboratory. Laboratory tests may provide the best
estimates of hydraulic conductivity for materials in the unsaturated zone, but are likely to be
less accurate than field methods for materials in the saturated zone (Cantor et al., 1987).
4.3.4.3 Data Evaluation
For comparisons of hydraulic conductivity measurements, the following criteria should
be used to determine the accuracy or completeness of information:
Use of a single well test will necessitate that more individual tests be
conducted at different locations to define sufficiently the variation in hydraulic
conductivity across the site.
Field hydraulic conductivity measurements generally provide average values for
the entire area across a well screen. Short well screens are necessary to
measure the hydraulic conductivity of discrete stratigraphic intervals. On the
other hand, in situations where well screens only partially penetrate an aquifer,
it is difficult, if not impossible, to correct mathematical equations for the
resultant distortion in flow patterns created during the pump test (Driscoll,
1986; Fetter, 1980). If the average hydraulic conductivity for a formation is
required, entire formations may be screened, or data may be combined from
overlapping clusters.
It is important that measurements define both the vertical and horizontal components
of hydraulic conductivity across a site. Laboratory tests on cores collected during the boring
program may be helpful in ascertaining vertical hydraulic conductivity in saturated strata. In
assessing the accuracy of hydraulic conductivity measurements at a site, results from the
boring program used to characterize the site geology should be considered. Zones of high
November 1992
4-51
-------
permeability or fracture identified from drilling logs should be considered when evaluating
hydraulic conductivity. Information from boring logs can be used to refine the data generated
by single or multiple well tests, and a comparison with existing data from nearby localities
that are in a similar geologic setting also can be useful.
4.3.5 Determining Ground-Water Flow Rate
The calculation of average ground-water flow rate (average linear velocity of ground-
water flow), or seepage velocity, is discussed in detail in USEPA (1989c), in Freeze and
Cherry (1979), and in Kruseman and deRidder (1989). The average linear velocity of ground-
water flow (v) is a function of hydraulic conductivity (K), hydraulic gradient (i), and effective
porosity (ne):
v = - Ki
Methods for determining hydraulic gradient and hydraulic conductivity are presented
in Sections 4.3.3 and 4.3.4 of this Manual. Effective porosity, the percentage of the total
volume of a given mass of soil, unconsolidated material, or rock that consists of
interconnected pores through which water can flow, should be estimated from laboratory tests
or estimated from values cited in the literature. (Fetter (1980) provides a good discussion of
effective porosity. Barari and Hedges (1985) provide default values for effective porosity.)
USEPA (1989c) provides methods for determining flow rates in heterogeneous and/or
anisotropic systems and should be consulted prior to calculating flow rates.
4.4 Interpreting and Presenting Data
The following sections offer guidance on interpreting and presenting hydrogeologic
data collected during the site characterization process. Graphical representations of data, such
as cross sections and maps, are typically extremely helpful both when evaluating data and
when presenting data to interested individuals.
4.4.1 Interpreting Hydrogeologic Data
Once the site characterization data have been collected, the following tasks should be
undertaken to support and develop the interpretation of site hydrogeologic data:
Review borehole and well logs to identify major rock, unconsolidated material,
and soil types and establish their horizontal and vertical extent and distribution;
From borehole and well log (and outcrop, where available) data, construct a
minimum of two representative cross-sections for each hazardous waste
November 1992
4-52
-------
management unit, one in the direction of ground-water flow and one orthogonal
to ground-water flow;
Identify zones of suspected high hydraulic conductivity, or structures likely to
influence contaminant migration through the unsaturated and saturated zones;
Compare findings with other studies and information collected during the
preliminary investigation to verify the collected information; and
Determine whether laboratory and field data corroborate and are sufficient to
define petrology, effective porosity, hydraulic conductivity, lateral and vertical
stratigraphic relationships, and ground-water flow directions and rates.
After the hydrogeologic data are interpreted, the findings should be reviewed to:
Identify information gaps;
Determine whether collection of additional data or reassessment of existing
data is required to fill in the gaps; and
Identify how information gaps are likely to affect the ability to design a RCRA
monitoring system.
Generally, lithologic data should correlate with hydraulic properties (e.g., clean, well
sorted, unconsolidated sands should exhibit high hydraulic conductivity). If the investigator is
unable to: 1) correlate stratigraphic units between borings; 2) identify zones of potentially
high hydraulic conductivity, their thickness and lateral extent; or 3) identify confining
formations/layers, their thickness and lateral extent, then additional boreholes should be
drilled and additional samples should be collected to adequately describe the hydrogeology of
the site.
Owners and operators should evaluate the potential for confining units to degrade in
the presence of site-specific waste types. In pristine areas, the possible future chemical
degradation of a confining layer should be of concern during any assessment monitoring or
corrective action at the facility. Marls, limestones, and dolomites, for instance, are chemically
attacked by low pH wastes because of their carbonate content. Studies have shown that
certain concentrated organic liquids can cause desiccation of clay minerals, which can lead to
cracking and to a significant increase in permeability (Daniel et al., 1988). Smectitic, and to
a lesser extent illitic, clays are ineffective barriers to the migration of many highly-
concentrated organic chemicals. In contaminated areas, a clay-rich, but chemically- degraded
confining layer may lead to unanticipated contaminant migration. An example of how a
contaminant may affect the integrity of a confining layer is shown in Figure 6.
November 1992
4-53
-------
When establishing the locations of wells that will be used to monitor ground water in
hydrogeologic settings characterized by ground-water flow in porous media, the following
should be documented:
Ground-water flow rate should be based on accurate measurements of hydraulic
conductivity and hydraulic gradient, and accurate measurements or estimates of
effective porosity;
The horizontal and vertical components of flow should be accurately depicted
in flow nets and based on valid data; and
Any seasonal or temporal variations in the water table or potentiometric
surface, and in vertical flow components, should be determined.
Once an understanding of horizontal and vertical ground-water flow has been
established, it is possible to estimate where monitoring wells will most likely intercept
contaminant flow.
4.4.2 Presenting Hydrogeologic Data
Subsequent to the generation and interpretation of site-specific geologic data, the data
should be presented in geologic cross-sections, topographic maps, geologic maps, and soil
maps. The Agency suggests that owners/operators obtain or prepare and review topographic,
geologic, and soil maps of the facility, in addition to site maps of the facility and waste
management units. In cases where suitable maps are not available, or where the information
contained on available maps is not complete or accurate, detailed mapping of the site should
be performed by qualified and experienced individuals. An aerial photograph and a
topographic map of the site should be included as part of the presentation of hydrogeologic
data and should meet the requirements of §§270.13(h) and 270.14(b)(19), respectively. The
topographic map should be constructed under the supervision of a qualified surveyor and
should provide contours at a maximum of two-foot intervals, as shown in Figure 7. Aerial
photographs with acetate overlays, the use of geologic data bases, or Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) may be suitable methods for presenting some data.
Geologic and soil maps should be based on rock, unconsolidated material, and soil
identifications gathered from borings and outcrops. The maps should use colors or symbols
to represent each soil, unconsolidated material, and rock type that outcrops on the surface.
The maps also should show locations of all borings and outcrops placed during the site
characterization. Geologic and soil maps are important because they can provide interpretive
information describing how site geology fits into the local and regional geologic setting.
November 1992
4-54
-------
TIME A
PIEZOMETER
PIEZOMETER
CLUSTER
; i; i; IITST; 1:1:1:1:1:1 JMARL
!;:•!;:•!; ;!;!
TIME B
PIEZOMETER
PIEZOMETER
CLUSTER
200 FEET
'Some clays such as montmorillonite and illite
are susceptible to degradation by
solvent-contaminated leachate
LEGEND
WELL AND SCREEN
Y_ . WATER TABLE
EXAMPLE OF A CONTAMINANT AFFECTING THE INTEGRITY OF A CONFINING LAYER
FIGURE 6
November 1992
4-55
-------
cc
in
cc
o
o
IH
o
cc
i
1
y
£
2
o
ui
o!
I
s
FIGURE 7
November 1992
4-56
-------
Structure contour maps and isopach maps should be prepared for each water-bearing
zone that comprises the uppermost aquifer and for each significant confining layer, especially
the one underlying the uppermost aquifer. A structure contour map depicts the configuration
(i.e., elevations) of the upper or lower surface or boundary of a particular geologic or soil
formation, unit, or zone. Structure contour maps are especially important in understanding
DNAPL movement because DNAPLs may migrate in the direction of the dip of lower
permeability units. Separate structure contour maps should be constructed for the upper and
lower surfaces (or contacts) of each of the zones of interest. Isopach maps should depict
contours that indicate the thickness of each of these zones. These maps are generated from
borings and geologic logs, and from geophysical measurements. In conjunction with the
cross-sections, these maps are used to help determine monitoring well locations, depths, and
screen lengths during the design of the detection monitoring system.
A potentiometric surface map or water table map should be prepared for each water-
bearing zone that comprises the uppermost aquifer. Potentiometric surface and water table
maps should show both the direction and rate of ground-water flow and the locations of all
piezometers and wells on which they are based. The water level measurements for all
piezometers and wells on which the potentiometric surface map or water table map is based
should be shown on the potentiometric surface or water table map. If seasonal or temporal
variations in ground-water flow occur at the site, a sufficient number of potentiometric
surface or water table maps should be prepared to show these variations. Potentiometric
surface and water table maps can be combined with structure contour maps for a particular
formation or unit.
An adequate number of cross sections (at least two for each hazardous waste
management unit at the facility) should be prepared to depict significant stratigraphic and
structural trends and to reflect stratigraphic and structural features in relation to local and
regional ground-water flow. On each cross section, the following should be depicted or
reported:
Orientation (aspect);
Horizontal and vertical scale;
Location of match points or intersections with other cross sections or with
geophysical survey lines;
Topography;
Lithology of all stratigraphic units;
Structural features;
November 1992
4-57
-------
Measured hydraulic conductivity values;
Each well used to construct the cross section, including:
Well identifier (well number),
Distance and direction the well is offset from the line of section,
Total depth of borehole,
Well depth,
Screened interval, and
Water level and date measured;
Each borehole used to construct the cross section, including:
Borehole identifier (borehole number),
Distance and direction the borehole is offset from the line of section,
and
Borehole depth;
Information obtained from surface and borehole geophysical surveys, as
available; and
Total depths and liquid depths of natural and human-made surface water bodies
and waste management units (e.g., streams, ditches, impoundments, ponds), as
available.
If these details are not available, the site characterization is inadequate. Figure 8 is an
example of an acceptable geologic cross-section.
4.4.3 The Conceptual Model
Conceptualization is the process of integrating the individual components or
characteristics of the hydrogeologic system, including the characteristics of the managed
wastes. The conceptual model is the integrated picture of the hydrogeologic system and the
waste management setting. Conceptual models are expressed both narratively and graphically.
The two objectives of a conceptual model in a detection monitoring program are:
November 1992
4-58
-------
(FEET, MSL)
JSS
LVvkl
Q
Z
111
C3
3cc
I-L1J
5 g o
LU LU
5 -p- 5
O
o
oo
_ O
O
UJ
«P
(A
(A
O
DC
O
O
O
g
o
.
O
UJ
Q.
s
o
o
o
o
CO
FIGURE 8
November 1992
4-59
-------
To develop a sound and informed understanding of both the waste type and
waste management scenario, and of the geology, hydrogeology,
andgeochemistry of the vadose zone, the uppermost aquifer, and its confining
layer(s); and
To predict the movement of contaminants into and through the uppermost
aquifer.
The conceptual model is the product of the review and interpretation of the data
presentation/reduction outputs (e.g., maps, cross-sections) described in the previous sections.
An accurate conceptual model of the site should be the final output of the site
characterization program. The conceptual model should incorporate all essential features of
the hydrogeologic system and waste type under study. The final conceptual model should be
a site-specific description of the hydrogeology of the vadose zone, the uppermost aquifer, and
its confining units; it should consider the characteristics of the wastes managed at the facility;
and it should contain all of the information necessary to design an adequate monitoring
system. The degree of detail and accuracy that is necessary to develop a conceptual model
varies according to hydrogeologic setting and waste type. For example, a homogeneous
unconfined aquifer may demand only simple cross-sections and water table maps to illustrate
the conceptual model. In contrast, more complicated settings with multiple aquifers, multiple
confining layers, and complex waste types will demand more complex hydrogeologic models
such as flow-nets, potentiometric surface or water table maps for each aquifer, geochemical
diagrams, and a series of structure contour and isopach maps. In formulating the conceptual
model, the hydrogeologist should only consider those geologic features that affect
ground-water flow, quality, and contaminant transport.
A preliminary conceptual model is formulated early in the site investigation process
using data obtained during the preliminary investigation to establish the hydrogeologic and
waste management setting. The model is gradually refined by building an understanding of
the site-specific information obtained during the boring program and other field investigations.
Interpretation of data through cross-sections and maps improves the model until a final
integrated picture of the site's hydrogeologic and waste management setting is established.
The development of the conceptual model is an ongoing process that should continue
throughout the entire site characterization program. Interim conceptual models developed at
the various stages of the site characterization are invaluable for planning subsequent field
investigation activities so that they are properly directed towards supplying missing
information.
After the detection monitoring system has been installed, the conceptual model of a
site should be further refined as additional information regarding the site is obtained. For
instance, various natural and artificial factors (e.g., the installation of a water supply well in
the vicinity of the site, salt-water intrusion, the construction of a dam) may affect
November 1992
4-60
-------
environmental conditions at the site years after the monitoring system is installed. Similarly,
environmental characteristics or conditions that were not discerned during field investigations
(e.g., reversal in the direction of ground-water flow during flood conditions) may become
evident in the future, thus requiring reevaluation of the conceptual model. A refinement of
the conceptual model may require that the owner/operator modify the ground-water
monitoring system.
November 1992
4-61
-------
CHAPTER FIVE
DETECTION MONITORING SYSTEM DESIGN
This chapter discusses the design of detection monitoring systems. Section 5.1
addresses the design of detection monitoring systems in environments where ground-water
flow occurs through porous media. As discussed in Section 4.3.1, the term "porous media"
generally encompasses both unconsolidated granular deposits and rock (Freeze and Cherry,
1979). In some areas underlain by fractured rock or karst terrane, ground-water flow does not
conform to the principles that describe ground-water flow through porous media. In these
settings, ground-water flow may occur predominantly through conduits and fractures.
Appropriate supplemental monitoring strategies for these settings are discussed in detail in
Section 5.2.
5.1 Ground-Water Monitoring in Aquifers Dominated by Ground-Water
Flow Through Porous Media
This section provides guidance for determining the number and location of detection
monitoring wells in aquifers dominated by ground-water flow through porous media. The
correct placement of monitoring wells relative to hazardous waste management units is an
obvious goal of a detection monitoring program.
5.1.1 Introduction
The location of both background and point of compliance (i.e., downgradient)
monitoring wells at permitted facilities must comply with the requirements of §264.97. Point
of compliance monitoring wells should be located so that they intercept potential pathways of
contaminant migration. Background wells should be located so that they provide ground-
water samples that are representative of the quality of ground water that has not been affected
by leakage from the waste management unit. The number and location of monitoring wells
must allow for the detection of contamination when hazardous waste or hazardous
constituents have migrated from the waste management area to the uppermost aquifer
(§264.97(a)(3)).
There is no required minimum number of wells at permitted facilities; the
owner/operator is simply required to install a "sufficient" number of wells to allow for
determination of background water quality and the water quality at the point of compliance.
Typically, the minimum number of wells specified for interim status facilities in 40 CFR
§265.91 (a) will not be sufficient for achieving the performance objectives of a detection
monitoring system because site hydrogeology is too complex or the hazardous waste unit is
too large. Supplemental monitoring wells may be required in conjunction with point of
compliance wells to ensure early detection of contamination. In addition, unsaturated zone
November 1992
5-1
-------
monitoring may be necessary where it would aid in detecting early migration of contaminants
into ground water.
The basic goals of the site characterization process described in the previous chapter
are the description of the hydrogeological setting and the identification of the potential
pathways for contaminant migration. This information is the foundation for the entire
ground-water monitoring program and is crucial to the proper placement of monitoring wells.
Although a monitoring system should be designed based on site-specific conditions, there are
a number of practices that can be applied to ensure that detection monitoring systems satisfy
RCRA regulatory requirements. These are discussed in the following sections.
5.1.2 Placement of Point of Compliance Monitoring Wells
This section separately addresses the lateral placement and the vertical sampling
intervals of point of compliance wells. However, these two aspects of well placement should
be evaluated together in the design of the detection monitoring system. Site-specific
hydrogeologic data obtained during the site characterization should be used to determine the
lateral placement of detection monitoring wells, and to select the length and vertical position
of monitoring well intakes. Potential pathways for contaminant migration are three
dimensional. Consequently, the design of a detection monitoring network that intercepts these
potential pathways requires a three-dimensional approach.
The criteria for evaluating the location of point of compliance wells relative to waste
management areas are described in Section 5.1.2.1. Section 5.1.2.2 contains the
hydrogeologic criteria for evaluating lateral placement of point of compliance wells. Section
5.1.2.3 details the rationale for selection of the vertical placement and sampling intervals of
detection monitoring wells. Section 5.1.2.4 discusses the need for vadose zone monitoring.
5.1.2.1 Location of Wells Relative to Waste Management Areas
RCRA regulations for permitted facilities require point of compliance wells to be
designed and installed to detect releases of hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents
to ground water. To meet regulatory requirements (§264.95(a) and §264.97(a)(3)), point of
compliance monitoring wells should be installed adjacent to a hazardous waste management
unit along its downgradient limit unless the Regional Administrator has specified an alternate
point of compliance pursuant to §264.95(a)(l). In a practical sense, this means that point of
compliance monitoring wells should be as close as physically possible to the edge of
hazardous waste management unit(s), as shown in Figure 9, and screened in all transmissive
zones that may act as contaminant transport pathways. The lateral placement of monitoring
wells should be based on the number and spatial distribution of potential contaminant
migration pathways and on the depths and thicknesses of stratigraphic horizons that can serve
as contaminant migration pathways.
November 1992
5-2
-------
o
HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT
UNIT A
N
GROUND-WATER
FLOW
o
HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT
UNIT B
LI MIT OF WASTE
MANAGEMENTAREA
100'
200'
GROUND-WATER
FLOW
O
o
1
HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT
UNIT A
LIMIT OF WASTE
MANAGEMENTAREA
N
HAZARDOUS
WASTE MANAGEMENT
UNIT B
B
LEGEND
fo DETECTION MONITORING
w WELL
y\ UPGRADJENJ (BACKGROUND)
MONITORING WELL
DOWNGRADIENT WELLS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT AREA LIMITS
FIGURE 9
November 1992
5-3
-------
At certain existing units, physical obstacles may prevent the installation of monitoring
wells at the point (or points) of compliance. In these cases, the Regional Administrator may
specify an alternate point (or points) of compliance that is as close to the waste management
area as practical, provided the performance standard of early detection of contamination is
met.
5.1.2.2 Lateral Placement of Point of Compliance Monitoring Wells
Point of compliance monitoring wells should be placed laterally along the
downgradient edge of hazardous waste management units to intercept potential pathways for
contaminant migration. The local ground-water flow direction and gradient are the major
factors in determining the lateral placement of point of compliance wells. In a homogenous,
isotropic hydrogeologic setting, well placement can be based on general aquifer characteristics
(e.g., direction and rate of ground-water flow), and potential contaminant fate and transport
characteristics (e.g., advection, dispersion). More commonly, however, geology is variable
and preferential pathways exist that control the migration of contaminants. These types of
heterogeneous, anisotropic geologic settings can have numerous, discrete zones within which
contaminants may migrate.
Potential migration pathways include zones of relatively high intrinsic (matrix)
hydraulic conductivities, fractured/faulted zones, and subsurface material that may increase in
hydraulic conductivity if the material is exposed to waste(s) managed at the site (e.g., a
limestone layer that underlies an acidic waste). In addition to natural hydrogeologic features,
human-made features may influence the ground-water flow direction and thus, the lateral
placement of point of compliance wells. Such human-made features include ditches, areas
where fill material has been placed, buried piping, buildings, leachate collection systems, or
adjacent disposal units. These considerations are discussed further in Section 4.3.3.4. The
lateral placement of monitoring wells should be based on the number and spatial distribution
of potential contaminant migration pathways and on the depths and thicknesses of
stratigraphic horizons that can serve as contaminant migration pathways.
In some settings, the ground-water flow direction may reverse seasonally (depending
on precipitation), change as a result of tidal influences or river and lake stage fluctuations, or
change temporally as a result of well pumping or changing land use patterns. In other
settings, ground water may flow away from the waste management area in all directions. In
such cases, EPA recommends that to comply with the requirements of §264.97(a)(3),
monitoring wells should be installed on all sides (or in a circular pattern) around the waste
management area to allow for the detection of contamination. In these cases, certain wells
may be downgradient only part of the time, but such a configuration should ensure that
releases from the unit will be detected. In these hydrogeologic settings, ground-water
sampling and water level elevation measurements must be performed more frequently than
semi-annually, which is the required minimum frequency specified in 40 CFR Part 264,
Subpart F.
November 1992
5-4
-------
The lateral placement of monitoring wells also should be based on the
physical/chemical characteristics of the hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents that
control the movement and distribution of the hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents
in the subsurface. These characteristics include, but are not limited to: solubility, Henry's
Law constant, partition coefficients, specific gravity, contaminant reaction or degradation
products, and the potential for contaminants to degrade confining layers. For example,
contaminants with low solubilities and high specific gravities that occur as DNAPLs may
migrate in the subsurface in directions different from the direction of ground-water flow.
Therefore, in situations where the release of DNAPLs is a concern, the lateral placement of
compliance point ground-water monitoring wells should not necessarily only be along the
downgradient edge of the hazardous waste management unit. Considering both contaminant
characteristics and hydrogeologic properties is important when determining the lateral
placement of monitoring wells.
5.1.2.3 Vertical Placement and Screen Lengths
Proper selection of the vertical sampling interval is necessary to ensure that the
monitoring system is capable of detecting a release from the hazardous waste management
area. The vertical position and lengths of well intakes are functions of: (1) hydrogeologic
factors that determine the distribution of, and fluid/vapor phase transport within, potential
pathways of contaminant migration to and within the uppermost aquifer, and (2) the chemical
and physical characteristics of contaminants that control their transport and distribution in the
subsurface. Well intake length also is determined by the need to obtain vertically-discrete
ground-water samples. Owners and operators should determine the probable location, size,
and geometry of potential contaminant plumes when selecting well intake positions and
lengths.
Site-specific hydrogeologic data obtained during the site characterization should be
used to select the length and vertical position of monitoring well intakes. The vertical
positions and lengths of monitoring well intakes should be based on the number and spatial
distribution of potential contaminant migration pathways and on the depths and thicknesses of
stratigraphic horizons that can serve as contaminant migration pathways.
The depth to, and thickness of a potential contaminant migration pathway can be
determined from soil, unconsolidated material, and rock samples collected during the boring
program, and from samples collected while drilling the monitoring well. Direct physical data
can be supplemented by geophysical data, available regional/local hydrogeological data, and
other data that provide the vertical distribution of hydraulic conductivity. The vertical
sampling interval is not necessarily synonymous with aquifer thickness. Monitoring wells are
often screened at intervals that represent a portion of the thickness of the aquifer. When
monitoring an unconfmed aquifer, the well screen typically should be positioned so that a
portion of the well screen is in the saturated zone and a portion of the well screen is in the
unsaturated zone (i.e., the well screen straddles the water table).
November 1992
5-5
-------
The vertical positions and lengths of monitoring well intakes should be based on the
physical/chemical characteristics of the hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents that
control the movement and distribution of the hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents
in the subsurface. These characteristics include, but are not limited to: solubility, Henry's
Law constant, partition coefficients, specific gravity, contaminant reaction or degradation
products, and the potential for contaminants to degrade confining layers. Considering both
contaminant characteristics and hydrogeologic properties is important when choosing the
vertical position and length of the well intake. Some contaminants may migrate within very
narrow zones.
Different transport processes control contaminant migration depending on whether the
contaminant dissolves or is immiscible in water. Immiscible contaminants may occur as
LNAPLs, which are lighter than water, and DNAPLs, which are denser than water. Most
LNAPLs are hydrocarbon oils and fuels. Most DNAPLs are highly chlorinated hydrocarbons
(e.g., carbon tetrachloride, tetrachloroethylene, and PCBs). Identifying whether or not a
compound may exist as an DNAPL or an LNAPL is complicated by the substance in which it
is dissolved. For example, free phase PCBs may be denser than water (DNAPL), but PCBs
in oil can be transported as an LNAPL. Additional information on NAPL migration is
provided by USEPA (1989) and USEPA (1991).
LNAPLs migrate in the capillary zone just above the water table. Wells installed to
monitor LNAPLs should be screened at the water table/capillary zone interface, and the
screened interval should intercept the water table at its minimum and maximum elevation.
LNAPLs may become trapped in residual form in the vadose zone and become periodically
remobilized and contribute further to aquifer contamination, either as free phase or dissolved
phase contaminants, as the water table fluctuates and precipitation infiltrates the subsurface.
The migration of free-phase DNAPLs may be primarily influenced by the geology,
rather than the hydrogeology, of the site. That is, DNAPLs migrate downward through the
saturated zone due to density, and then migrate by gravity along less permeable geologic units
(e.g., the slope of confining units, the slope of clay lenses in more permeable strata, bedrock
troughs), even in aquifers with primarily horizontal groundwater flow. Consequently, if
wastes disposed at the site are anticipated to exist in the subsurface as a DNAPL, the
potential DNAPL should be monitored:
At the base of the aquifer (immediately above the confining layer);
In structural depressions (e.g., bedrock troughs) in lower hydraulic conductivity
geologic units that act as confining layers;
Along lower hydraulic conductivity lenses and units within units of higher
hydraulic conductivity; and/or
November 1992
5-6
-------
"Down-the-dip" of lower hydraulic conductivity units that act as confining
layers, both upgradient and downgradient of the waste management area.
Because of the nature of DNAPL migration (i.e., along structural, rather than hydraulic,
gradients), wells installed to monitor DNAPLs may need to be installed both upgradient and
downgradient of the waste management area. It may be useful to construct a structure
contour map of lower permeability strata and identify lower permeability lenses upgradient
and downgradient of the unit along which DNAPLs may migrate; then locate the wells
accordingly.
The lengths of well screens used in ground-water monitoring wells can significantly
affect their ability to intercept releases of contaminants. The complexity of the hydrogeology
of a site is an important consideration when selecting the lengths of well screens. Most
hydrogeologic settings are complex (heterogeneous and anisotropic) to a certain degree.
Highly heterogeneous formations require shorter well screens to allow sampling of discrete
portions of the formation that can serve as contaminant migration pathways. Well screens
that span more than a single saturated zone or a single contaminant migration pathway may
cause cross-contamination of transmissive units, thereby increasing the extent of
contamination. Well intakes should be installed in a single saturated zone. Well intakes
(e.g., screens) and filter pack materials should not interconnect, or promote the
interconnecting of, zones that are separated by a confining layer.
Even in hydrologically simple formations, or within a single potential pathway for
contaminant migration, the use of shorter well screens may be necessary to detect
contaminants concentrated at particular depths. A contaminant may be concentrated at a
particular depth because of its physical/chemical properties and/or because of hydrogeologic
properties. In homogeneous formations, a long well screen can permit excessive amounts of
uncontaminated formation water to dilute the contaminated ground water entering the well.
At best, dilution can make contaminant detection difficult; at worst, contaminant detection is
impossible if the concentrations of contaminants are diluted to levels below the detection
limits for the prescribed analytical methods. The use of shorter well screens allows for
contaminant detection by reducing excessive dilution and, when placed at depths of predicted
preferential flow, shorter well screens are effective in monitoring the aquifer or the portion of
the aquifer of concern.
Generally, screen lengths should not exceed 10 feet. However, certain hydrogeologic
settings may warrant or necessitate the use of longer well screens for adequate detection
monitoring. Unconfmed aquifers with widely fluctuating water tables may require longer
screens to intercept the water table surface at both its maximum and minimum elevations and
to provide monitoring for the presence of contaminants that are less dense than water.
Saturated zones that are slightly greater in thickness than the appropriate screen length (e.g.,
12 feet thick) may warrant monitoring with longer screen lengths. Extremely thick
homogeneous aquifers (e.g., greater than 300 feet) may be monitored with a longer screen
November 1992
5-7
-------
(e.g., a 20-foot screen) because a slightly longer screen would represent a fairly discrete
interval in a very thick formation. Formations with very low hydraulic conductivities also
may require the use of longer well screens to allow sufficient amounts of formation water to
enter the well for sampling. The importance of accurately identifying such conditions
highlights the need for a complete hydrogeologic site investigation prior to the design and
placement of detection wells.
Multiple monitoring wells (well clusters or multilevel sampling devices) should be
installed at a single location when: (1) a single well cannot adequately intercept and monitor
the vertical extent of a potential pathway of contaminant migration, or (2) there is more than
one potential pathway of contaminant migration in the subsurface at a single location, or (3)
there is a thick saturated zone and immiscible contaminants are present, or are determined to
potentially occur after considering waste types managed at the facility. Conversely, at sites
where ground water is contaminated by a single contaminant, where there is a thin saturated
zone, and where the site is hydrogeologically homogeneous, the need for multiple wells at
each sampling location is reduced. Table 6 summarizes factors affecting the decision to
install multiple or single wells at a single location. The number of wells that should be
installed at each sampling location increases with site complexity.
5.1.2.4 Vadose Zone Monitoring
At some sites where the potentiometric surface or water table is considerably below
the ground surface, contaminants may migrate in the vadose zone for long distances or for
long periods of time before they reach ground water. At other sites, the potential may exist
for contaminants to migrate laterally beyond the downgradient extent the monitoring well
network along low hydraulic conductivity layers within the vadose zone. A vadose zone
monitoring system may be necessary in these and other cases to detect any release(s) from the
hazardous waste management area before significant environmental contamination has
occurred. Leachate released to the vadose zone, for example, may be detected and sampled
using tensiometers. The use of vadose zone monitoring equipment can potentially save the
owner/operator considerable expense by alerting him or her to the need for corrective action
before large volumes of the subsurface have been contaminated.
The Agency recommends unsaturated zone monitoring where it would aid in detecting
early migration of contaminants into ground water. The Regional Administrator also can
require this monitoring on a case-by-case basis as necessary to protect human health and the
environment under §§3004(u) and 3005(c). The elements, applications, and limitations of a
vadose zone monitoring program are provided by Wilson (1980) and USEPA (1986b).
Moreover, the Agency is currently updating its existing guidance on vadose zone monitoring.
November 1992
5-8
-------
TABLE 6
FACTORS AFFECTING THE NUMBER OF WELLS PER LOCATION (CLUSTERS)
One Well Per Sampling Location
More Than One Well Per Sampling Location
No LNAPLs or DNAPLs (immiscible
liquid phases)
Presence of LNAPLs or DNAPLs
Thin flow zone (relative to screen length)
Horizontal flow predominates
Thick flow zones
High vertical gradient present
Heterogeneous anisotropic uppermost
aquifer; complicated geology
- multiple, interconnected aquifers
- variable lithology
- perched water zones
- discontinuous structures
Homogeneous isotropic uppermost
aquifer; simple geology
Discrete fracture zones in bedrock
Solution conduits (i.e., caves) in karst
terranes
• Cavernous basalts
S60A-17
1. At the majority of sites, well clusters will be necessary to establish vertical
hydraulic gradient and the vertical distribution of contaminants.
November 1992
5-9
-------
5.1.3 Placement of Background (Upgradient) Monitoring Wells
The ground-water monitoring well system must allow for the detection of
contamination when hazardous waste or hazardous constituents have migrated from the waste
management area to the uppermost aquifer. A sufficient number of background wells must be
installed at appropriate locations and depths to yield ground-water samples from the
uppermost aquifer that represent the quality of background water that has not been affected by
leakage from a regulated unit (§264.97(a)). In most cases, background wells should be
located hydraulically upgradient of the waste management unit(s); however, in certain
circumstances a determination of background ground-water quality may include sampling of
wells that are not hydraulically upgradient of the waste management area. Specifically,
§264.97(a)(l)(i) provides that the determination of background ground-water quality may
include sampling wells that are not hydraulically upgradient of the waste management area
where:
Hydrogeologic conditions do not allow the owner or operator to determine
what wells are hydraulically upgradient; or
Sampling at other wells will provide an indication of background ground-water
quality that is representative or more representative than that provided by the
upgradient wells.
A sufficient number of background monitoring wells should be installed to allow for
stratified (depth-discrete) comparisons of water quality and to account for spatial variability in
ground-water quality. Background monitoring wells should not be screened over the entire
thickness of any saturated zone that can act as a contaminant transport pathway. Screening
the entire thickness of such zones will not allow depth-discrete water quality data to be
obtained. Instead, shorter well screens should be placed at depths comparable to those used
for detection monitoring wells as shown in Figure 10. Background and point of compliance
wells must be screened in the same hydrostratigraphic position to allow collection of
comparable ground-water quality data. Stiff and Piper diagrams can aid in this determination.
Hem (1989) is a good reference on ground-water chemistry.
To establish background ground-water quality, it is necessary to establish ground-water
flow direction(s) and to place wells hydraulically upgradient of the waste management area.
Certain geologic and hydrologic situations make the determination of hydraulically upgradient
locations difficult. These cases require careful site characterization to position or place
background wells properly. Examples of such cases include the following:
Waste management areas above naturally occurring or human-made
ground-water mounds;
November 1992
5-10
-------
UPGRADIENT
(BACKGROUND)
WELL
CLUSTER
REGULATED UNIT
MONITORING
WELL
CLUSTER
2A 2B 2C
CLAY K = 7.1 x lO^cm/sec sli[\
CLAY K = 5.6 x 10-wcmlsec
LEGEND
I
.v.
J7_
WELL AND SCREEN
WATER TABLE
FOR UPPERMOST SAND
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE
FOR LOWER SAND
EXAMPLE OF THE PLACEMENT OF BACKGROUND MONITORING WELLS
FIGURE 10
November 1992
5-11
-------
Waste management areas located above aquifers in which ground-water flow
directions change seasonally;
Waste management areas located close to a property boundary in the
upgradient direction;
Waste management areas containing immiscible contaminants with densities
greater than or less than water;
Waste management areas located in areas where nearby surface water can
influence ground-water elevations (e.g., river floodplains);
Waste management areas located near intermittently or continuously used
production wells; and
Waste management areas located in structurally complex areas where folded
strata or fault zones may modify flow.
In these situations, a monitoring well network in which the wells are located in a
circular pattern or on all sides of the waste management unit may be necessary.
Background wells should be located far enough from waste management units to avoid
contamination by the units. In the event that background wells become contaminated by a
release from the waste management unit(s), new background wells that will not be affected by
the release should be installed.
5.2 Ground-Water Monitoring in Aquifers Dominated by Conduit Flow
As described in Section 4.3.1, conventional ground-water hydrology considers aquifers
to be porous media having a well-defined water table or potentiometric surface. The
following sections provide a strategy for conducting ground-water monitoring in
hydrogeologic settings where conduit flow predominates.
5.2.1 Introduction
Ground-water monitoring regulations of Subpart F require a ground-water monitoring
system consisting in part of monitoring wells installed at the hydraulically downgradient limit
of the waste management area(s) that are capable of detecting contamination that has migrated
to the uppermost aquifer. For a facility to receive an operating permit, the ground-water
monitoring system at the facility must meet the requirements of §264.97 (unless the owner or
operator is exempted from the requirements under §264.90). While meeting these criteria is
typically not problematic in aquifers dominated by flow through porous media, it can be
difficult in aquifers dominated by conduit flow. In aquifers dominated by conduit flow,
November 1992
5-12
-------
subsurface conduits are the primary pathways that contaminant releases follow. Identifying
and intercepting these conduits with wells is an extremely formidable task. Identifying
contaminant transport pathways requires detailed site characterization beyond what is
currently performed at most RCRA facilities. In addition, the wide fluctuations in the water
table that are characteristic of aquifers dominated by conduit flow make identification and
satisfactory monitoring of the uppermost aquifer particularly difficult.
It may be possible for some facilities that are sited above conduit flow aquifers to
have ground-water monitoring systems that meet the performance standards of 40 CFR
§264.97. The Regional Administrator may require the facility owner or operator to monitor
seeps, springs, and caves that are hydraulically connected to the uppermost aquifer and that
are within the facility boundary to supplement the monitoring well network. These
supplemental monitoring sites can be used in conjunction with point of compliance wells to
detect releases from the facility (§264.97(a)(3)). However, the Agency expects that these
cases will be rare, and that most facilities sited in karst settings will be unable both to meet
the performance standards of §264.97 and to receive an operating permit. Therefore, prior to
locating a waste management facility in an area where any conduit flow exists, an owner or
operator should consider the inherent difficulties in meeting the ground-water monitoring
requirements of Subpart F. The owner/operator should select a different location if it appears
as though a release to a conduit flow aquifer could not be detected or controlled during a high
precipitation event. The following sections of requirements and guidance are for owners and
operators of facilities located above aquifers dominated by conduit flow that meet the
performance standards of §264.97. These sections provide additional information on
designing a supplemental monitoring well network for the seeps, springs, and conduits that
are hydraulically connected to the uppermost aquifer and that are located on the facility
property.
5.2.2 Using Springs as Monitoring Sites in Aquifers Dominated by Conduit
Flow
In certain circumstances, the Regional Administrator may request that a strategy of
monitoring seeps, springs, and cave streams be applied to supplement monitoring well
systems in all aquifers dominated by conduits that drain to springs and that discharge on land
or along the shores of streams, rivers, lakes, or seas. In terranes where conduit flow
predominates, springs and cave streams (if they have been shown by tracer studies to drain
from the facility being evaluated) are the easiest and most reliable sites at which to monitor
ground-water quality (Field, 1988; Quinlan, 1989; Quinlan, 1990).
Most springs that should be sampled regularly during tracer tests and ground-water
monitoring are not shown on USGS topographic quadrangle maps. Furthermore, the inclusion
of a spring on a topographic map is not necessarily an indicator of the significance of its
discharge, as many minor springs are included on maps because of their cultural associations.
In certain cases, the owner/operator will need to conduct detailed field work to locate all
November 1992
5-13
-------
springs in the area of a TSDF sited in a karst terrane. This is a necessary step in the process
of determining whether conduit or diffuse-flow predominates.
Springs, seeps, and directly accessible cave springs may need to be tested by tracing
not only during moderate flow, but also during flood flow and base flow, to prove their
usefulness for monitoring. Testing must be conducted during the extremes of expected flow
conditions because flow routing in conduit-flow systems commonly varies as stage changes.
During flood conditions, water levels in streams, rivers, and lakes may rise, and some of this
water may move temporarily through conduits that are dry during low-flow conditions and
discharge into adjacent ground-water basins.
There are certain characteristics of water movement in a karst aquifer dominated by
conduit flow that should be recognized if a monitoring strategy is to be effective. One
characteristic is distributary flow. During periods of high stage, water (and contaminants if
they are present) from the headwaters or mid-reaches of a ground-water basin may flow to all
springs in its distributary system. Distributary flow is most pronounced in areas of
aggradation of river valleys (e.g., Mammoth Cave, Kentucky) where many alternate conduits
at and below base level are available (deep sediment fill covering the bedrock floor of the
valley). Such a system is shown in Figure 11. Radial flow also may be identified during
dye-tracing and monitoring of springs (Aley, 1988). Radial flow is most common in highly
fractured mountain areas. Another unusual characteristic encountered is subsurface drainage
paths that cut across surface drainage divides without any surface indication. Ground-water
flow can parallel surface drainages, but usually not over long distances. This subterranean
piracy of water from one surface watershed to another is not uncommon in many karst
terranes. An example of watershed piracy that was discovered by tracer studies is described
by Jones (1973). Given the possibility of variable ground-water movement in aquifers
dominated by conduit flow, owners and operators may need to perform tracer studies to
delineate flow paths for ground-water monitoring accurately.
5.2.3 Using Wells as Monitoring Sites in Aquifers Dominated by Conduit
Flow
The placement of wells in karst terranes with subsurface conduits is rarely effective.
Installing a suite of wells to intercept cave streams that have been shown by tracing to flow
from the facility is a good strategy, but cave streams can be practically impossible to locate.
A second alternative for selecting monitoring well locations in aquifers with conduit flow is
to place wells along fractures or fracture trace intersections. Tracer studies should be used to
verify a hydraulic connection with the ground water beneath a facility under base-flow and
flood-flow conditions. Although some cave passages coincide with various types of fracture
traces and lineaments, not all fractures and fracture-related features are directly connected
with cave passages. Many cave streams are developed along bedding planes, and are thus
unaffected by vertical fractures. This fact lessens the probability that a well drilled on a
November 1992
5-14
-------
N
A
Spring or Springs
Distributary (Schematic)
Number of Distributary Springs
Cross-over Route
! 3 Miles
I 5 Km
DISTRIBUTARY SPRINGS ALONG THE GREEN RIVER NEAR MAMMOTH CAVE, KENTUCKY
AS DETERMINED BY TRACER STUDIES. THE NUMBERS GIVE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
SPRINGS IN A GIVEN DISTRIBUTARY SYSTEM OR SUBSYSTEM
(AFTER QUINLAN AND EWERS, 1985)
FIGURE 11
November 1992
5-15
-------
fracture trace or lineament, or at the intersection of such linear features, will intercept a cave
stream.
Wells that were originally sited without consideration of conduit flow should be used
for monitoring only if tracing has first proven a connection from the waste management
facility to each of the monitoring wells under varying flow conditions. Domestic,
agricultural, and industrial wells are sited and installed for purposes other than ground-water
monitoring. Even previously installed monitoring wells designed to detect contaminants, to
intercept contaminant plumes, or to function as upgradient monitoring wells should be
considered randomly located unless they were deliberately sited along fracture traces or
fracture-trace intersections. Piezometer clusters are excellent in porous media, but will
provide relatively little information in most karst terranes. Piezometer clusters do have value
in defining the diffuse-flow component of a karst aquifer, but this could lead to (1) incorrect
interpretation of subsurface flow characteristics, and (2) greatly added site characterization
expenses. Randomly located and non-randomly located wells not intended for aquifer testing
or ground-water tracing should be used as monitoring wells only if tracing shows a direct link
to the conduit system to be monitored. Such wells should not, however, be used as
monitoring wells for a facility above an aquifer dominated by conduit flow or diffuse flow,
unless tracer studies show that the well is downgradient from the facility to be monitored.
5.2.4 Tracing to Identify Monitoring Sites in Aquifers Dominated by Conduit
Flow
Ground-water tracing is a well-developed tool that enables catchment boundaries to be
delineated, ground-water flow velocities to be estimated, areas of recharge and discharge to be
determined, and sources of pollution to be identified. Ground Water Tracers, by Davis et al.
(1985) is an EPA-sponsored compendium that discusses many facets of ground-water tracing.
Another good reference concerning ground-water tracing is Quinlan (1990). It is important to
consult an individual who is experienced in ground-water tracing, and to get approval from
the appropriate regulatory authorities before any tracer study is initiated.
A tracer should have a number of properties to be considered useful, including the
following:
Its potential chemical and physical behavior in ground water should be
understood;
It should travel with the same velocity as the water and not interact with solid
material;
It should be nontoxic for most uses;
It should be inexpensive;
November 1992
5-16
-------
It should be easily detected with widely available and simple technology;
It should be present in concentrations well above background concentrations of
the same constituent in the natural system that is being studied; and
It should not modify the hydraulic conductivity or other properties of the
medium being studied.
Three classes of water tracing agents are available:
Natural labels - flora and fauna, principally micro-organisms
ions in solution
environmental isotopes
Pulses - natural pulses of discharge, solutes and sediment
artificially generated pulses
Artificial labels - radiometrically detectable substances
dyes
salts
spores.
Artificial fluorescent dyes are the principal and most successful water tracers for
conduit-flow aquifers at the present time. Dyes are injected intentionally into ground water
for the purpose of tracing the movement of fluids in active ground-water systems. Under
ideal circumstances, dyes can be injected into a perennial sinking stream on the facility site.
If a stream is not available, tank-trucks of water and dye can be injected at the following sites
in a karst terrane, listed in decreasing order of desirability:
1. Sinkhole with a hole at its bottom.
2. Sinkhole without a hole at its bottom; excavation may reveal a hole that can be
used.
3. Losing-stream reach with intermittent flow.
4. Class V stormwater drainage well.
5. Well drilled on a fracture trace or a fracture-trace intersection.
November 1992
5-17
-------
6. Abandoned domestic, agricultural, or industrial well.
7. Well randomly drilled for dye injection.
To save the trouble and expense of a wasted dye test, percolation or slug tests should
be conducted at the injection point to determine if the injection point is open to the aquifer
and to see how rapidly it drains. The tracer injection point should be on, or as near as is
practicably possible to, the facility property. The use of injection sites that are not near the
facility property will most certainly be questioned by the regulatory authority because of the
possibility that the monitoring locations identified by the tracer test are not hydraulically
connected to the facility.
The detection limit for fluorescent dyes is lower than nonfluorescent dyes, therefore, in
general, less fluorescent dye is required for tracer tests (Quinlan, 1987). Although fluorescent
dyes exhibit many of the properties of an ideal tracer, a number of factors interfere with
concentration measurement. These factors include suspended sediment load, temperature, pH,
CaCO3 concentration, salinity, etc. (Quinlan, 1987). At the sampling point, preferably a
spring, grab samples can be taken or small pockets of nylon can be filled with activated
charcoal and suspended in the water. The dye adsorbs very strongly on to the charcoal and is
later desorbed in a lab and analyzed. To detect dyes, a filter fluorometer can be used in the
field or a spectrofluorometer can be used in the lab. For additional discussions of
ground-water tracing, the reader is referred to Davis et al. (1985), and the EPA documents
Application of Dye Tracing Techniques for Determining Solute Transport Characteristics of
Ground Water in Karst Terranes (1988), and Ground-Water Monitoring in Karst Terranes
(1989). In addition, Quinlan (1990) discusses the special problems of ground-water
monitoring in karst terranes.
Figure 12 is a map that shows how the results of a dye-tracing study can be displayed
graphically. The most important information to depict is the location of: all points where
dye was introduced (sinkholes, sinking streams, wells, etc.); all springs and wells in the area;
and those springs and wells where dye was recovered. The routes travelled by the dye are
usually shown as straight or curvilinear lines that connect the tracer injection points and the
springs. In most cases, straight lines should be used to schematically depict the routes
travelled by the dye, unless extensive data have been collected to justify the depiction of the
ground-water flow paths as curvilinear lines. Line drawings of known cave systems with
hydraulically connected streams that occur between the surface introduction points and the
springs or wells where dye was recovered also are useful for such a map.
5.2.5 Sampling Frequency in Aquifers Dominated by Conduit Flow
Under 40 CFR Part 264 Subpart F, ground-water monitoring frequency is specified by
the Regional Administrator in the facility's permit and either must at a minimum include four
samples collected semi-annually during detection and compliance monitoring periods pursuant
November 1992
5-18
-------
o>
ZW
o
O _|
UJ d
DC LL
w z °»
DC O ^
< tr of
i- >- <
z t x
S z UJ
OT O ^
5
UJ ~
O <
< t
oc o
FIGURE 12
November 1992
5-19
-------
to §§264.98(d) and 264.99(f), or must be an alternate sampling procedure specified under
§264.97(g)(2). This minimum monitoring frequency is inadequate for karst terranes
dominated by conduit flow, because the storage time of the water is low and the
concentrations of contaminants in conduit systems can vary over a short period of time.
Therefore, hourly sampling of aquifers dominated by conduit flow is recommended before,
during, and after storm or other runoff (e.g., snowmelt) events, although this is a site-specific
determination. As described by Quinlan (1990), in aquifers dominated by conduit flow,
"sampling should start at base flow, before the beginning of a storm or meltwater event, and
continue until 4 to 30 times the time to the hydrograph peak has elapsed, depending upon the
extent to which an aquifer is characterized by conduit flow as opposed to diffuse flow.
Sampling may have to be done as often as at 1 to 6-hour intervals in the early part of a
precipitation event and at 4 to 24-hour intervals in the waning part of its hydrograph."
Data from the samples collected during the peak runoff should be compared with
samples collected during base flow under fair-weather conditions at other times of the year.
This should enable a reliable assessment of the ground-water quality to be made. Quinlan
and Alexander (1987) discuss the rationale for sampling frequencies of ground water in karst
aquifers dominated by conduit flow in much greater detail. The work performed by Quinlan
and Alexander (1987) is site-specific, and while it illustrates the considerable extent to which
spring discharge should be evaluated, the results obtained by Quinlan and Alexander should
not be taken as representative of all sites located above karst aquifers dominated by conduit
flow.
The previous discussion highlights the various difficulties associated with ground-
water monitoring in karst aquifers. Site characterization of these hydrogeologic settings is
complex, time consuming, and potentially costly. The Agency again emphasizes its belief
that most facilities sited in karst settings will not be able to meet the ground-water monitoring
requirements of Subpart F; therefore, alternative locations for land disposal of hazardous
wastes are preferred.
5.2.6 Fracture Trace Analysis
The detection of ground-water contamination in fracture-controlled aquifers can be
problematic due to the difficulties in locating the fracture systems that often dominate the
ground-water flow system. Fracture traces have been mapped for the purpose of locating
zones of increased weathering, porosity, and permeability that act as preferential pathways of
contaminant migration. Strong correlations between well yields and fracture traces in
carbonates, igneous rock, metamorphic rock, fractured siltstones, and fractured sandstones
have been documented by numerous authors (Jansen and Taylor, 1988). Fracture trace
analysis should be performed at sites where hydrogeologic data indicate that contaminant
migration may occur along fractures.
November 1992
5-20
-------
Fracture traces are believed to be the surface expressions of localized bedrock jointing
and small faults (Casper, 1980). Recent studies have indicated that fracture orientations
measured on the surface have similar orientations to those in the subsurface (McGlew and
Thomas, 1984). Fractures may result from local adjustment to regional stress conditions, and
may be the surface expression of minor faults, solution zones, concentrated jointing, or
separation of strata during folding (Casper, 1980).
A fracture trace analysis is performed by examining remote sensing imagery such as
aerial photography for linear and curvilinear features at various scales, which are related to
bedrock fractures. There are many types of imagery available in different scales. The
selection of the proper imagery for a given study area depends on the topography, type of
vegetation, soil moisture content, expected size of surface expression of geologic features,
size of the study area, and numerous other features (Jansen and Taylor, 1988).
Fracture traces are viewed in stereoscopic analysis of aerial photographs. By
systematically viewing small portions of the area, it is possible to locate fracture traces
expressed by continuous or discontinuous tonal variations of surface features (Casper, 1980).
November 1992
5-21
-------
CHAPTER SIX
MONITORING WELL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
The following sections provide a basic summary of monitoring well design and
construction techniques. Pursuant to §264.97(c)(l), owners and operators must document in
the operating record the design, installation, development, and decommission of any
monitoring wells, piezometers, and other measurement, sampling, and analytical devices. A
comprehensive guide to choosing appropriate drilling techniques is presented by Aller et al.
(1989). Although much of the guidance presented in this Chapter may be applied to the
design and installation of piezometers, this section is geared to the design and construction of
monitoring wells that will be used to meet the requirements of 40 CFR §264.97.
Furthermore, many of the techniques presented in the following sections are described more
completely in other references and generally will not be discussed in detail in this Chapter.
6.1 Monitoring Well Drilling Methods
The method chosen for drilling a monitoring well depends largely on the following
factors described by Aller et al. (1989):
Versatility of the drilling method;
Relative drilling cost;
Sample reliability (ground-water, soil, unconsolidated material, or rock
samples);
Availability of drilling equipment;
Accessibility of drilling site;
Relative time required for well installation and development;
Ability of the drilling technology to preserve natural conditions;
Ability to install well of desired diameter and depth; and
Relative ease of well completion and development, including ability to install
well in the given hydrogeologic setting.
In addition to these factors, Aller et al. (1989) have developed matrices to assist in
selecting an appropriate drilling method. These matrices list the most commonly used drilling
November 1992
6-1
-------
techniques for monitoring well installation taking into consideration hydrogeologic settings
and the objectives of the monitoring program.
The Agency has developed basic guidance to assist in the selection of drilling
procedures for installing monitoring wells pursuant to 40 CFR Part 264, Subpart F, as
follows:
Drilling should be performed in a manner that preserves the natural properties
of the subsurface materials;
Contamination and/or cross-contamination of ground water and aquifer
materials during drilling should be avoided;
The drilling method should allow for the collection of representative samples of
rock, unconsolidated materials, and soil;
The drilling method should allow the owner/operator to determine when the
appropriate location for the screened interval has been encountered;
The drilling method should allow for proper placement of the filter pack and
annular sealants. The borehole should be at least 4 inches larger in diameter
than the nominal diameter of the well casing and screen to allow adequate
space for placement of the filter pack and annular sealants;
The drilling method should allow for the collection of representative ground-
water samples. Drilling fluids (including air) should be used only when
minimal impact to the surrounding formation and ground water can be ensured.
The following guidance applies to the use of drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives,
and lubricants when drilling ground-water monitoring wells:
Drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives, or lubricants that impact the analysis of
hazardous constituents in ground-water samples should not be used;
The owner/operator should demonstrate the inertness of drilling fluids, drilling
fluid additives, and lubricants by performing analytical testing of drilling fluids,
drilling fluid additives, and lubricants and/or by providing information
regarding the composition of drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives, or
lubricants obtained from the manufacturer;
The owner/operator should provide the Regional Administrator with a
discussion of the potential impact of drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives, and
November 1992
6-2
-------
lubricants on the physical and chemical characteristics of the subsurface and on
ground-water quality; and
The volume of drilling fluids, drilling fluid additives, and lubricants used
during the drilling of a monitoring well should be recorded.
The following sections summarize the most commonly used methods for drilling
ground-water monitoring wells. These methods also are summarized briefly in Table 7.
Table 8 summarizes the limitations and applications of each drilling method. Aller et al.
(1989) should be consulted for additional information on the selection of drilling methods.
6.1.1 Hollow-Stem Augers
The hollow-stem, continuous-flight auger is the most frequently employed tool for
drilling monitoring wells in unconsolidated materials. Augers are likened to giant screws, and
continuous flighting refers to a design in which the flights ("threads") of the auger extend the
entire length of the auger core or stem. Individual auger sections, typically 5-feet in length,
are also called flights.
When drilling, a cutting head is attached to the first auger flight, and as the auger is
rotated downward, additional auger flights are attached, one at a time, to the upper end of the
previous auger flight. As the augers are advanced downward, the cuttings move upward
along the continuous flighting. The hollow-stem or core of the auger allows drill rods and
samplers to be inserted through the center of the augers. The hollow-stem of the augers also
acts to temporarily case the borehole, so that the well screen and casing may be inserted
down through the center of the augers once the desired depth is reached, minimizing the risk
of possible collapse of the borehole that might occur if it is necessary to withdraw the augers
completely before installing the well casing and screen.
The hollow-stem auger drilling technique is not without problems. These are more
completely described in Aller et al. (1989) but generally include:
Cross-contamination of subsurface materials — Because drill cuttings are in
contact with the entire length of the borehole as they are transported up the
auger flights, hollow-stem augers may cause cross-contamination of subsurface
materials;
Heaving — Sand and gravel heaving into the hollow-stem may be difficult to
control and may necessitate adding water to the borehole;
Smearing of silts and clays along the borehole wall - In geologic settings
characterized by alternating sequences of sands, silts, and clays, the action of
the augers during drilling may cause smearing of clays and silts into the sand
November 1992
6-3
-------
O
Ui
o
o
o
o
UJ
O
tn
=3
O
oc
cc
e
(A
D
O
O
OC
o
"8
£D
O)
c
"C
Q
CM
ffl —
,g 03
_ , c
, Q_
Unconsolidated or poor
consolidated materials
more than 125 feet dee
•
•
•
•
Consolidated rock
formations less
than 500 feet deep
•
•
•
•
Consolidated rock
formations more
than 500 feet deep
_
' £
1
ll
= O
T3 D>
£ o
8§
(15
"o Q-
c «p
O m
o •&
^ c
'g O
•55 "g
og
^3 -0
-*-; 05
'o. o
Q. '5
11
« E
2} <5 -'
"J^ CO "^
o !c
Q)J— X^
w i §
If S
-S 03 C?
o £ o
<5 § ^
££»
NOTE:
Although several
be more suitable
the judgment of tl
TABLE?
November 1992
6-4
-------
APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF WELL DRILLING METHODS (ALLER, ET AL. (1989))
^^J^mm^^:[:::^^. - :^^:f :§:•:?: : ; . - :>;>^r;tv:|:; :[;?;'
Applications
• All types of soil investigations
• Permits good soil sampling with split-spoon
or thin-wall samplers
• Water-quality sampling
• Monitoring well installation in all
unconsolidated formations
• Can serve as temporary casing for coring
rock
• Can be used in stable formations to set
surface casing (example: drill 12-inch
borehole; remove augers; set 8-inch casing;
drill 7 1/4-inch borehole with 3 1/4-inch ID
augers to rock; core rock with 3-inch tools;
install 1-inch piezometer; pull augers)
Limitations
• Difficulty in preserving sample integrity in heaving
formations
• Formation invasion by water or drilling mud if
used to control heaving
• Possible cross contamination of aquifers where
annular space not positively controlled by water
or drilling mud or surface casing
• Limited diameter of augers limits casing size
• Smearing of clays may seal off aquifer to be
monitored
ii^ki^^Sf^
Applications
• Shallow soils investigations
• Soil samples
• Vadose zone monitoring wells (lysimeters)
• Monitoring wells in saturated, stable soils
• Identification of depth to bedrock
• Fast and mobile
Limitations
• Unacceptable soil samples unless split-spoon or
thin-wall samples are taken
• Soil sample data limited to areas and depths
where stable soils are predominant
• Unable to install monitoring wells in most
unconsolidated aquifers because of borehole
caving upon auger removal
• Depth capability decreases as diameter of auger 1
increases •
• Monitoring well diameter limited by auger •
diameter 1
*'••-,.'•'"•'"''•"'•'••: ' • - ,° - .* \ * ~ *" - ''- ** V. » ', - - - - ^ -v ^ ° *v ; " , - v *„ t ,^" -,•""- " " ' * " - ;- ^ - "- *• - -^^1
Applications
• Drilling in all types of geologic formations
• Almost any depth and diameter range
• Ease of monitoring well installation
• Ease and practicality of well development
• Excellent samples of coarse-grained
materials
^•^••^^^^^^^•B
Limitations 1
• Drilling relatively slow I
• Heaving of unconsolidated materials must be 1
controlled 1
• Equipment availability more common in central, 1
north central and northeast sections of the 1
United States •
550A-19.pg1
TABLES
November 1992
6-5
-------
APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF WELL DRILLING METHODS (ALLER, ET AL. (1989))
(continued)
AJR ROTARY DRILLING
Applications
Limitations
• Rapid drilling of semi-consolidated and
consolidated rock
• Good quality reliable formation samples
(particularly if small quantities of water and
surfactant are used)
• Equipment generally available
1 Allows easy and quick identification of
lithologic changes
• Allows identification of most water-bearing
zones
• Allows estimate of yields in strong
water-producing zones with short "down
time"
• Surface casing frequently required to protect top
of hole
• Drilling restricted to semi-consolidated and
consolidated formations
• Samples occur as small particles that
are difficult to interpret
• Drying effect of air may mask lower yield water
producing zones, only allowing identification of
significant water-bearing zones
• Air stream requires contaminant filtration
• Air may modify chemical or biological conditions;
recovery time is uncertain
AIR ROTARY WITH CASING DRIVER DRILLING
Applications
Limitations
• Rapid drilling of unconsolidated sands, silts
and clays
• Drilling in alluvial material (including boulder
formations)
• Casing supports borehole thereby
maintaining borehole integrity and
minimizing inter-aquifer cross contamination
• Eliminates circulation problems common with
direct mud rotary method
• Good formation samples
> Minimal formation damage as casing pulled
back (smearing of clays and silts can be
anticipated)
• Thin, low pressure water bearing zones easily
overlooked if drilling not stopped at appropriate
places to observe whether or not water levels
are recovering
• Samples pulverized as in all rotary drilling
• Air may modify chemical or biological conditions;
recovery time is uncertain
550A-19.pg. 2
TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)
November 1992
6-6
-------
TABLE 8
APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF WELL DRILLING METHODS (ALLER, ET AL. (1989))
(continued)
'MlJDROtAHYDWLliNt* " "' '- • • -• ;
Applications
« Rapid drilling of clay, silt and reasonably
compacted sand and gravel
« Allows split-spoon and thin-wall sampling in
unconsolidated materials
« Allows core sampling in consolidated rock
* Drilling rigs widely available
* Abundant and flexible range of tool sizes and
depth capabilities
* Very sophisticated drilling and mud programs
available
• Geophysical borehole logs
Applications
• Very rapid drilling through both
unconsolidated and consolidated formations
* Allows continuous sampling in all types of
formations
• Very good representative samples can be
obtained with minimal risk of contamination
of sample and/or water-bearing zone
• In stable formations, wells with diameters as
large as 6 inches can be installed in open
hole completions
•,-• : '•'•'-* "• •'. - • ; -••
Limitations
» Difficult to remove drilling mud and wall cake
from outer perimeter of filter pack during
development
» Bentonite or other drilling fluid additives may
influence quality of ground-water samples
* Circulated {ditch} samples poor for monitoring
well screen selection
» Split-spoon and thin-wall samplers are expensive
and of questionable cost effectiveness at depths
greater than 150 feet
» Wireline coring techniques for sampling both
unconsoiidated and consolidated formations
often not available locally
* Difficult to identify aquifers
» Drilling fluid invasion of permeable zones may
compromise validity of subsequent monitoring
well samples
Limitations
» Limited borehole size that limits diameter of
monitoring wells
» In unstable formations, well diameters are limited
to approximately 4 inches
• Equipment availability currently more common in
the southwest
» Air may modify chemical or biological conditions;
recovery time is uncertain
• Unable to install filter pack unless completed
open hole
550A-19.pg 3
TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)
November 1992
6-1
-------
TABLE 8
APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF WELL DRILLING METHODS (ALLER, ET AL. (1989))
(continued)
- oftweiwiijLS . . " • :;! V>; '. ." ;: $ -y. £ ' (:•'. ^
Applications
• Water-level monitoring in shallow formations
• Water samples can be collected
• De watering
• Water supply
• Low cost encourages multiple sampling
points
Limitations
• Depth limited to approximately 50 feet (except in
sandy material)
• Small diameter casing
• No soil samples
• Steel casing interferes with some chemical
analysis
• Lack of stratigraphic detail creates uncertainty
regarding screened zones and/or cross
contamination
• Cannot penetrate dense and/or some dry
materials
• No annular space for completion procedures
f^^HtoM^;.;: ,.;^ >=; ;;•• <-; •;;-;-: ; .;;[;;; ::r ;„;;.'. ;!j,; -4; :" = ;:-:'.; -v
Applications
• Allows water-level measurement
• Sample collection in form of cuttings to
surface
• Primary use in unconsolidated formations,
but may be used in some softer
consolidated rock
• Best application is 4-inch borehole with
2-inch casing and screen installed, sealed
and grouted
Limitations
• Drilling mud may be needed to return cuttings to
surface
• Diameter limited to 4 inches
• Installation slow in dense, bouldery clay/till or
similar formations
• Disturbance of the formation possible if borehole
not cased immediately
550A-19.pg4
TABLE 8 (CONTINUED)
November 1992
6-8
-------
zones, potentially resulting in a considerable decrease in aquifer hydraulic conductivity along
the wall of the borehole. The smearing of clays and silts along the borehole wall may,
depending on the site-specific properties of the geologic materials, significantly reduce well
yield or produce unrepresentative ground-water samples even after the well has been
developed; and
Management of drill cuttings — Control of contaminated drill cuttings is
difficult with the auger method, especially when drilling below the water table.
6.1.2 Solid-Stem Augers
Drilling with solid-stem augers is similar to drilling with hollow-stem augers except
solid-stem augers are made of solid steel, and therefore need to be removed from the borehole
to collect "undisturbed" split-spoon or thin-wall samples and to install casing. Boreholes
drilled in unconsolidated and poorly consolidated deposits in which solid-stem augers are used
will typically not remain stable after saturated materials are encountered, and will collapse
after the augers are removed. Consequently, "undisturbed" samples of the unconsolidated
materials can generally be collected only above the water table. An alternative drilling
method is generally used below the water table once the borehole is advanced through
unsaturated deposits.
6.1.3 Cable Tool
Cable tool drilling is a versatile method for sampling and well installation. When the
drill rig is equipped with fishing jars and a sampling barrel, continuous samples are retrieved
and there is minimal disturbance to the borehole wall. Drilling progresses by raising and
dropping the upper half of the jars (the jars are an interlocking set of steel hammers which
slide independently of each other) while the lower half rests on the bottom of the borehole.
There is a sampling tube attached to the bottom of the lower half of the jars. The hammering
action of the jars drives the sampling barrel into the ground. This method will not work in
consolidated bedrock but is applicable to virtually all overburden materials. Borehole
instability can be overcome by using the jars to drive casing ahead of the sampling zone.
Sand heaving can often be overcome by filling the casing with water to maintain a positive
head.
The advantages of cable tool drilling include versatility, applicability to both hard and
soft formations, minimal smearing, suitability for identifying thin subsurface zones, and
usefulness over a wide range of depths. However, problems involving heaving may occur
with cable tool drilling.
November 1992
6-9
-------
6.1.4 Air Rotary
Rotary drilling involves the use of circulating fluids (i.e., mud, water, or air) to
remove the drill cuttings and to maintain an open hole as drilling progresses. Air rotary
drilling forces air down the drill pipe and back up the borehole to remove the drill cuttings.
The air rotary drilling technique is best suited for use in hard rock (versus unconsolidated or
poorly consolidated materials).
Accurate detection of ground-water contamination at hazardous waste disposal sites is
dependent on the generation of high-quality chemical data from the analysis of representative
soil, unconsolidated material, rock, and ground-water samples. One of the most important
goals of any method used to obtain samples is to create minimal effects on the media and
contaminants of concern. The air rotary drilling method may jeopardize the collection of
representative and accurate chemical data. For this reason, and for others listed below, the air
rotary drilling method should be used with caution during environmental investigations:
Air rotary does not allow collection of representative samples, therefore, the
boring cannot be logged with accuracy. Moreover, air/ground water losses into
fractures or other highly permeable zones cannot be measured.
The injection of air into the borehole during air rotary drilling may alter the
natural properties of the subsurface. Specifically, the following chemical and
physical processes may occur:
Air-stripping of volatile organic constituents can occur during
drilling, leading to erroneous chemical data for these compounds
for both soil and ground-water samples;
Injection of air into the subsurface can significantly alter aquifer
geochemistry. Alteration of such properties as pH and redox
potential can often be irreversible, thus preventing the well from
yielding ground-water samples that are representative of in situ
conditions. Changes in pH can affect the solubility of metallic
compounds; changes in oxidation state can result in the
precipitation of metallic and organo-metallic compounds; and
The introduction of oxygen into the aquifer can initiate or
greatly increase biodegradation of organic compounds in the
aquifer near the vicinity of the borehole. Monitoring wells
installed under these circumstances would be unable to yield
representative ground-water samples.
November 1992
6-10
-------
Unless an oil-less compressor is used, the risk exists for introducing some
quantity of compressor oil into the borehole. This can occur even when oil-
removing filters are used, because their effectiveness depends on careful
maintenance. At best, the issue of whether oil has been introduced into the
aquifer will remain suspect. There is generally no way to tell when compressor
filters need changing because most drilling equipment has safety bypass valves
that route the air around plugged filters.
Control and containment of contaminated drill cuttings can be extremely
difficult, and could result in the spread of contamination at the ground surface.
Personnel safety considerations may require upgrading to higher levels of
respiratory and dermal protection due to the generation of dusts, mists, and
volatilization of organic compounds. Cuttings are difficult to contain and may
pose a safety threat to drill crews working on contaminated sites.
Although use of the air rotary drilling method should not be completely rejected,
owners/operators should take the following precautionary steps when using the air rotary
drilling method:
The air from the compressor should be filtered to ensure that compressor oil is
not introduced into ground water. The QAPjP should specify when and how
the filters will be monitored to prevent breakthrough.
Air rotary drilling should not be used in areas where upper soil horizons are
contaminated. In such settings, sloughing of the sidewalls of the borehole
would likely result in contamination of the ground water.
Air rotary drilling techniques should not be used in highly contaminated
environments. When air rotary is used in an environment where even minor
subsurface contamination is expected, shrouds, canopies, bluooey lines, or
directional pipes should be used to contain and direct the drill cuttings away
from the drill crew. Any contaminated materials (soil and/or water) should be
collected and properly treated or disposed of in an approved waste disposal
facility. Moreover, when drilling through potentially contaminated zones,
contaminants carried in the air flow can be introduced into other layers and
increase the zone of contamination. This problem can be lessened by installing
casing as the borehole is advanced.
The owner/operator should provide the Regional Administrator with a
discussion of the potential impact of the air rotary drilling method on the
physical and chemical characteristics of the subsurface and on ground-water
quality.
November 1992
6-11
-------
Air rotary drilling requires that care be taken both to prevent cross-contamination of
subsurface materials and to prevent contamination or chemical alteration of ground water or
subsurface materials.
6.1.5 Mud Rotary and Water Rotary
The mud rotary and water rotary drilling methods involve the introduction of drilling
fluids (various drilling muds or water) into the borehole through the drill pipe to maintain an
open hole, provide lubrication to the drill bit, and remove drill cuttings.
Water rotary drilling is a rapid and effective drilling method for most geologic
materials. However, the water used as a drilling fluid tends to react with the surrounding
formation and ground water. For this reason, the utility of water rotary drilling is limited. In
addition, there are other problems associated with water rotary drilling. The identification of
water-bearing zones is hampered by the addition of water into the borehole. In clay-rich
sediments, the water may form a slurry that can rapidly cause plugging of the formation,
resulting in a well that is difficult to develop. In poorly consolidated sediments, drillers may
have a problem with caving of the borehole prior to installation of the well screen and casing.
In highly fractured rock, it may be difficult to maintain effective water circulation because of
water losses to the subsurface. The drilling fluids used in rotary drilling can grossly
contaminate upper or lower uncontaminated zones if a contaminated zone is penetrated.
Driving casing as the borehole is advanced can help resolve this problem.
While there are hydrogeologic conditions where mud rotary drilling is the best option
(e.g., where it is extremely difficult to maintain a stable borehole), mud rotary creates a high
potential for affecting aquifer characteristics and ground-water quality. If the mud rotary
method is used, the drilling mud(s) should not affect the chemistry of ground-water samples
or samples from the borehole, or adversely impact the operation of the well. To minimize the
influence to the surrounding formation and ground water, drilling muds should be limited to
water-based, locally-occurring clays. The following describes the type of adverse affects that
can occur to the aquifer, ground-water quality, and/or well performance as a result of using
certain drilling muds. A more comprehensive review of the properties, applications, and
impacts of drilling fluids is given in Aller et al. (1989):
Bentonite muds form a filter cake on the sides of the borehole, thus reducing
the effective porosity of formations in the borehole, and compromising the
design of the well. Bentonite may also affect local ground-water pH.
Additives to modulate viscosity and density may also introduce contaminants to
the system or force large, unrecoverable quantities of mud into the formation.
Some organic polymers and compounds provide an environment for bacterial
growth, which reduces the reliability of sampling results.
November 1992
6-12
-------
Bentonite muds may adsorb metals, potentially reducing contaminant
concentrations and affecting the reliability of sampling results.
Direct mud rotary drilling is recommended by some investigators for use at heavily
contaminated sites or at sites where the contaminants of concern are highly toxic and where
proper containerization of drill cuttings and fluids is important. The technique requires
creating a leak-proof seal in a portable mud pit, so that returned drilling fluids and cuttings
will be contained within the pit. The cuttings may be transferred from the pit to drums as
necessary. Heavy-gauge plastic sheeting may be used to cover the exclusion zone and to
prevent equipment from contaminating surface soils. Obviously, owners/operators should
ensure that this application of direct mud rotary drilling does not cause cross-contamination of
subsurface materials.
6.1.6 Dual-Wall Reverse-Circulation
The dual-wall reverse-circulation rotary method utilizes a double-wall drill pipe, and
has the reverse circulation of other conventional rotary drilling methods. Air or water is
forced down the outer casing and is circulated up the inner drill pipe. Cuttings are lifted up
to the surface through the inner drill pipe. Either a hammer or tricone bit can be used to cut
the formation. A triple wall design, involving the placement of an additional single-wall
casing around the dual-wall drill string, may be useful in situations where it is necessary to
case a contaminated upper formation to install a well in an underlying formation.
The greatest advantage of dual-wall reverse-circulation drilling is that it allows
continuous sampling of the subsurface, and largely eliminates or reduces problems associated
with lost circulation and borehole stability. The disadvantages of dual-wall reverse-circulation
drilling include the necessity of using larger drilling equipment and a large borehole to
accommodate the dual-wall pipe.
6.1.7 Driven Wells
Driven wells consist of a steel well screen that is either welded or attached with drive
couplings to a steel casing. The well screen and attached casing are forced into the ground
by hand using a weighted drive sleeve, or with a heavy drive head mounted on a hoist. As
the well is driven, new sections of casing are attached to the well in 4- or 5-foot sections.
Several problems are commonly associated with the installation of driven wells. First,
it is difficult or impossible to drive a well through dense silts, clays or materials containing
boulders. If penetration in these materials is accomplished, the well screen may be destroyed
in the process. In addition, silts and/or clays can clog the well screen to the point where the
well cannot be satisfactorily developed. Two techniques, described in Aller et al. (1989) have
been employed in an attempt to alleviate these problems. Driven wells may be helpful as a
tool for preliminary field studies requiring installation of shallow piezometers. However, in
November 1992
6-13
-------
most cases, the Agency discourages the sole use of the driven well construction method for
the purpose of installing monitoring wells. This is primarily because of the inability to
collect representative samples of the materials that are penetrated during well installation, and
of the inability to seal the well properly unless an outer casing is driven first. However, if
samplers can be driven in advance of the casing to allow subsurface sample collection, the
driven well method may be a viable well installation option.
6.1.8 Jet Percussion
The jet percussion drilling method uses a wedge-shaped drill bit attached to the end of
the drill pipe. Water is forced under pressure down the drill pipe and is discharged through
ports on the sides of the drill bit. The bit is lifted and dropped while rotating. The water is
forced up the annular space between the drill pipe and the borehole wall, carrying cuttings to
the surface. The method is limited to unconsolidated or soft consolidated formations. The
disadvantages of this method include the inability to collect representative samples of ground-
water, soil, or unconsolidated deposits during drilling and the potential for disturbing the
formation.
6.1.9 Decontamination of Drilling Equipment
All drilling equipment that will encounter formation materials (e.g., augers, samplers,
tremie pipes) should at a minimum be decontaminated between boreholes, and in the case of
samplers, between samples. When cross-contamination between zones within a single
borehole is a concern, equipment should be decontaminated more frequently. Aller et al.
(1989) provide a comprehensive discussion of decontamination of drilling and formation-
sampling equipment.
The types of drilling and sampling equipment that should be decontaminated (Aller et
al., 1989) include:
Drill bits;
Auger sections;
Drill-string tools;
Drill rods;
Sampling equipment (e.g., split spoons);
Bailers used for well development or for the removal of fluids from the well;
Tremie pipes;
November 1992
6-14
-------
Clamps;
Hand tools;
Steel cable; and
Drill rigs and support vehicles.
The general cleaning procedure for drilling equipment should include washing the
equipment with potable water and/or hot pressurized potable water. For more contaminated
equipment, this procedure should be followed by a wash with non-phosphate detergent and a
final rinse with potable water (Moberly, 1985; Aller et al., 1989). Moberly (1985) presents a
list of additional cleaning solutions that may be used to clean drilling and formation-sampling
equipment, and provides their specific uses. If formation samples are being collected for
chemical analysis, then the cleaning procedure followed for the samplers should be analogous
to that provided for ground-water sampling equipment in Section 7.3.8.
6.1.10 Well Diameter
To avoid the possibility of having to handle large amounts of purged contaminated
water, the Agency recommends the use of either 2-inch or 4-inch diameter wells. If an
owner/operator believes that wells with diameters larger than 4 inches would improve sample
integrity at some or all of the well locations, then he/she should submit substantive
justification before installation of the larger diameter well(s). The use of larger diameter
wells may be necessary where dedicated purging or sampling equipment is used or where the
well is screened in a deep formation. When considering whether to install larger diameter
wells, the investigator should recognize that the quantity of contaminated ground water that
will require proper disposal, and in some settings the time required for well recovery, will
increase with well diameter.
6.1.11 Stratigraphic Control
Adequate Stratigraphic control is critical to the proper vertical placement of well
screens. Samples should be collected from boreholes at all suspected changes in lithology.
The deepest borehole drilled at the site should be continuously sampled. For boreholes that
will be completed as monitoring wells, at least one sample should be collected from the
interval that will be the monitoring well intake interval (i.e., screened interval or open
(uncased) interval). EPA recommends that all boreholes be continuously sampled to ensure
Stratigraphic control. Borehole samples should be classified according to their lithology or
pedology by an experienced professional in geology. Care should be taken to ensure that
samples of every geologic formation, especially all confining layers, are collected, and that
the nature of Stratigraphic contacts is determined.
November 1992
6-15
-------
The owner/operator should construct a minimum of two representative cross-sections
for each hazardous waste management unit, one in the direction of ground-water flow and one
orthogonal to ground-water flow. Cross-sections should be based on both the monitoring well
boring logs and on the boring logs from the subsurface boring program, and should depict
significant stratigraphic and structural trends and reflect stratigraphic and structural features in
relation to local and regional ground-water flow. Site stratigraphy represented on the cross-
sections should be compared against known regional stratigraphy to verify the well/boring
logs and to prepare an analysis of site-specific stratigraphy. In complex geologic settings, the
Agency recommends that borehole geophysical logging, surface geophysical surveys, and/or
cone penetrometer surveys be performed both to verify the logs of cuttings or samples and to
assist in establishing stratigraphic control. When planning such surveys it is important to
remember that drilling methods and well casings/screens will influence the selection of
geophysical methods (e.g., electrical resistivity logging cannot be performed in cased wells).
6.2 Well Casing and Screen Materials
Figure 13 is a drawing of a monitoring well. A casing and well screen are installed in
a ground-water monitoring well for several reasons: to provide access from the surface of the
ground to some point in the subsurface, to prevent borehole collapse, to permit ground-water
level measurements and ground-water sampling, and (for casing) to prevent hydraulic
communication between zones within the subsurface. Access to the monitored zone is
through the casing and into either an open borehole or the screened intake.
Monitoring well casing and screen materials should meet the following performance
specifications:
Monitoring well casing and screen materials should maintain their structural
integrity and durability in the environment in which they are used over their
operating life;
Monitoring well casings and screens should be resistant to chemical and
microbiological corrosion and degradation in contaminated and uncontaminated
waters;
Monitoring well casings and screens should be able to withstand the physical
forces acting upon them during and following their installation, and during their
use — including forces due to suspension in the borehole, grouting,
development, purging, pumping, and sampling, and forces exerted on them by
the surrounding geologic materials; and
Monitoring well casing and screen materials should not chemically alter
ground-water samples, especially with respect to the analytes of concern, as a
result of their sorbing, desorbing, or leaching analytes. For example, if a metal
November 1992
6-16
-------
VENTED WELL CAP
GAS VENT TUBE
PEA GRAVEL FOR EASY RETRIEVAL OF
TOOLS AND TO PREVENT SMALL
ANIMAL/INSECT ENTRANCE
THROUGH DRAIN DRAIN
PROTECTIVE CASING
FILLED WITH CEMENT
ABOVE LEVEL OF PAD
TO PREVENT PONDING
STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING WITH LOCKS
AND WELL IDENTIFICATION LABELLED ON
INNER AND OUTER SIDES OF CAP
SURVEYOR'S PIN (FLUSH MOUNT)
FORMED CONCRETE WELL APRON
(MINIMUM RADIUS OF 2' PAST EDGE
OF BOREHOLE AND 4" THICK)
V - 2' VERY FINE SAND TO IMPEDE
SEEPAGE OF ANNULAR SEALANTS
INTO SCREENED AREA
CENTRALIZER
CONTINUOUS POUR CONCRETE SURFACE SEAL
AND WELL APRON (EXPANDING CEMENT)
NEAT CEMENT (SHRINKAGE
COMPENSATED CEMENT)
WELL DIAMETER = 4"
BOREHOLE DIAMETER = 10" TO 12"
(NOMINAL DIMENSION)
BENTONITE CLAY SLURRY = 2'
FILTER PACK (21 ABOVE SCREEN)
SCREENED INTERVAL
CENTRALIZER
SUMP/SEDIMENT TRAP
BOTTOM CAP
550A-15
(NOT TO SCALE)
CROSS-SECTION OF TYPICAL MONITORING WELL
FIGURE 13
November 1992
6-17
-------
such as chromium is an analyte of interest, the well casing or screen should not
increase or decrease the amount of chromium in the ground water. Any
material leaching from the casing or screen should not be an analyte of interest,
or interfere in the analysis of an analyte of interest.
In addition, monitoring well casing and screen materials should be relatively easy to install
into the borehole during construction of the monitoring well.
Owners and operators also should consider the purpose of the well when determining
the well's design. Will the well be used solely as a piezometer? Will the well be placed in
an area where there is currently no contamination and where natural water quality is not
likely to interact with it? Will the well be used to delineate the extent of a plume, but not
used to determine compliance with cleanup levels? Will the well be used to extract
contaminated ground water as part of corrective action activities? Will the well be used as a
point-of-compliance well for which accurate information is crucial?
The following discussion of casing and screen materials comes from several sources,
but the majority of it is directly from the EPA/EMSL-Las Vegas Handbook of Suggested
Practices for the Design and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells (Aller et al.,
1989), with additional information from various references, as cited. EPA believes that the
use of this up-to-date technical guidance, along with the technical criteria provided below, aid
in the selection of appropriate well materials. In addition to references cited by Aller et al.
(1989) the following references also are available for consideration when choosing well
casing and screen materials:
Cowgill, U.M. 1988. The Chemical Composition of Leachate from a Two-
Week Dwell-Time Study of PVC Well Casing and Three-Week Dwell-Time
Study of Fiberglass Reinforced Epoxy Well Casing, in A.G. Collins and A.I.
Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods, ASTM STP 963,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 172-184.
Gillham, R.W. and S.F. O'Hannesin. 1990. Sorption of Aromatic
Hydrocarbons by Materials Used in Construction of Ground-Water Sampling
Wells, in D.M. Nielsen and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water and Vadose Zone
Monitoring, ASTM STP 1053, American Society for Testing and Materials,
Philadelphia, PA, pp. 108-122.
Hewitt, A.D. 1989. Leaching of Metal Pollutants from Four Well Casings
Used for Ground-Water Monitoring. CRREL Special Report 89-32, U.S. Army
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH 03755-1290.
November 1992
6-18
-------
Hewitt, A.D. 1992. Potential of Common Well Casing Materials to Influence
Aqueous Metal Concentrations. Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 12,
No. 2, pp. 131-136.
Jones, J.N. and G.D. Miller. 1988. Adsorption of Selected Organic
Contaminants onto Possible Well Casing Materials, in A.G. Collins and A.I.
Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods, ASTM STP 963,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 185-198.
Parker, L.V. 1991. Discussion of "The Effects of Latex Gloves and Nylon
Cord on Ground Water Sample Quality" by J.L. Canova & M.G. Muthig.
Ground Water Monitoring Review, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 167-168.
Parker, L.V., A.D. Hewitt, and T.F. Jenkins. 1990. Influence of Casing
Material on Trace-Level Chemicals in Well Water. Ground Water Monitoring
Review. Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 146-156.
Reynolds, G.W., J.T. Hoff, and R.W. Gillham. 1990. Sampling Bias Caused
by Materials Used to Monitor Halocarbons in Groundwater. Environmental
Science Technology. Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 135-142.
Laboratory studies of the effects of well casing materials on either inorganic or
organic dissolved constituents in ground water are still relatively inconclusive and incomplete;
they serve solely to demonstrate the potential for well casing-related alteration of ground-
water samples. The manipulation of raw data may allow investigators to reach conclusions
that are unsupported given further evaluation of the raw data and test conditions.
Construction materials for piezometers that will be used solely for measuring water
levels are not the focus of this section. For the purposes of water level monitoring during
detection monitoring, thermoplastic materials are usually adequate. However, in compliance
(or assessment) monitoring and corrective action, care should be taken to construct
piezometers of materials that will not degrade or react with contaminated ground water.
6.2.1 General Casing and Screen Material Characteristics
Historically, well casings and screens were produced predominantly for water supply
wells, and the selection of a well casing or screen material focused on structural strength,
durability in long-term exposure to natural ground-water environments, and ease of handling.
The selection of the most suitable well casing and screen materials should consider site-
specific factors, including:
November 1992
6-19
-------
Depth to the water-bearing zone(s) to be monitored and anticipated well depth;
Geologic environment;
Geochemistry of soil, unconsolidated material, and rock over the entire interval
in which the well is to be cased;
Geochemistry of the ground water at the site, as determined through an initial
analysis of samples from both background wells and downgradient wells and
including:
natural ground-water geochemistry,
nature of suspected or known contaminants, and
concentration of suspected or known contaminants; and
Design life of the monitoring well.
The most frequently evaluated characteristics that directly influence the performance of
casing and screen materials in ground-water monitoring applications are strength and
chemical resistance/interference. These characteristics are discussed in more detail below.
Strength-Related Characteristics
Well casing and screen materials should maintain their structural integrity and
durability in the environment in which they are used over their operating life. Monitoring
well casings and screens should be able to withstand the physical forces acting upon them
during and following their installation, and during their use, including forces due to
suspension in the borehole, grouting, development, purging, pumping, sampling, and forces
exerted on them by the surrounding geologic materials. When casing strength is evaluated,
three separate yet related parameters should be evaluated:
Tensile strength;
Compressive strength; and
Collapse strength.
The tensile strength of a material is defined as the greatest longitudinal stress the
material can bear without pulling the material apart. Tensile strength of the installed casing
varies with composition, manufacturing technique, joint type, and casing dimensions. For
monitoring wells, the selected casing and screen materials should have a tensile strength
November 1992
6-20
-------
capable of supporting the weight of the casing string when suspended from the surface in an
air-filled borehole. The tensile strength of the casing joints is equally as important as the
tensile strength of the casing. Because the joint is generally the weakest point in a casing
string, the joint strength will determine the maximum axial load that can be placed on the
casing. By dividing the tensile strength by the linear weight of casing, the maximum
theoretical depth to which a dry string of casing can be suspended in a borehole can be
calculated. When the casing is in a borehole partially filled with water, the buoyant force of
the water increases the length of casing that can be suspended. The additional length of
casing that can be suspended depends on the specific gravity of the casing material.
The compressive strength of a material is defined as the greatest compressive stress
that a substance can bear without deformation. Unsupported casing has a much lower
compressive strength than installed casing that has been properly grouted and/or backfilled,
because vertical forces are greatly diminished by soil friction. This friction component means
that the casing material properties are more significant to compressive strength than wall
thickness. Casing failure due to compressive strength limitation is generally not an important
factor in a properly installed monitoring well.
As important as tensile strength is the final strength-related property considered in
casing and screen selection — collapse strength. Collapse strength is defined as the capability
of a casing to resist collapse by any and all external loads to which it is subjected both during
and after installation. The resistance of casing to collapse is determined primarily by outside
diameter and wall thickness. Casing collapse strength is proportional to the cube of the wall
thickness. Therefore, a small increase in wall thickness provides a substantial increase in
collapse strength. Collapse strength is also influenced by other physical properties of the
casing material including stiffness and yield strength.
Casings and screens are most susceptible to collapse during installation before the
placement of the filter pack or annular seal materials around the casing. Although the casing
may collapse during development, once a casing is properly installed, collapse is seldom a
concern (National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). External loadings
on casing that may contribute to collapse include:
Net external hydrostatic pressure produced when the static water level outside
of the casing is higher than the water level on the inside;
Unsymmetrical loads resulting from uneven placement of backfill and/or filter
pack materials;
Uneven collapse of unstable formations;
Sudden release of backfill materials that have temporarily bridged in the
annulus;
November 1992
6-21
-------
Weight of the cement grout slurry, and impact of the heat of hydration of the
grout on the outside of a partially water-filled casing;
Extreme drawdown inside the casing caused by overpumping;
Forces associated with well development that produce large differential
pressures on the casing; and
Forces associated with improper installation procedures where unusual force is
used either to counteract a borehole that is not straight or to overcome buoyant
forces.
Of these stresses, only external hydrostatic pressure can be predicted and calculated
with accuracy; the others can be avoided by common sense and good practice. To provide a
sufficient margin against possible collapse by all normally-anticipated external loadings, a
casing should be selected so that resistance to collapse is more than required to withstand
external hydrostatic pressure alone. According to Purdin (1980), steps to minimize the
possibility of collapse include:
Drilling a straight, clean borehole;
Uniformly distributing the filter pack materials at a slow, even rate;
Avoiding the use of quick-setting (high temperature) cements for thermoplastic
casing installation;
Adding sand to cement to lower the heat of hydration; and
Controlling negative pressures inside the well during development.
Nielsen and Schalla (1991) provide a discussion on the physical strength of various
well casing and screen materials. Table 9 provides a summary of comparative strengths of
well casing materials.
Chemical Resistance Characteristics
Monitoring well casing and screen materials should maintain their structural integrity
and durability in the environment in which they are used over their operating life.
Monitoring well casings and screens should be resistant to chemical and microbiological
corrosion and degradation in contaminated and uncontaminated waters. Metallic casing and
screen materials are subject to corrosion, and thermoplastic casing and screen materials are
subject to chemical degradation by solvents. The extent to which these processes occur
depends on water quality within the formation and changing chemical conditions such as
November 1992
6-22
-------
COMPARATIVE STRENGTHS OF WELL CASING MATERIALS8 (NIELSEN AND SCHALLA, 1991)
Casing Tensile
Strength (Ib)
Casing Collapse
Strength (Ib/in2)
Material
2-in.
nominal
4-in.
nominal
2-in.
nominal
4-in.
nominal
Polyvinylehloride (PVC)
PVC casing joint
Stainless steel (SS)C
SS casing joint
Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)
PTFE casing joints
Epoxy fiberglass
Epoxy casing joints
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS)
ABS casing jointsd
7,500
2,800
37,760
15,900
3,800
540
22,600
14,000
8,830
3,360
22,000
6,050
92,000
81,750
No data
1,890
56,500
30,000
22,000
5,600
307
300
896
No data
No data
No data
330
230
No data
No data
158
150
315
No data
No data
Nodata
250
150
No data
No data
Information provided by E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Wilmington, DE.
All Joints are flush-threaded.
°Stainless steel casing materials are Schedule 5 with Schedule 40 joints; other casing materials (PVC,
PTFE, epoxy, ABS) are Schedule 40.
Joints are not flush-threaded, but are a special type that is thicker than Schedule 40.
TABLE 9
November 1992
6-23
-------
fluctuations between oxidizing and reducing conditions. Casing materials should be chosen
with a knowledge of existing and anticipated ground-water chemistry. Because subsurface
conditions cannot be predicted without some preliminary sampling and analysis, the choice of
appropriate well casing materials should be contingent upon preliminary water quality
analyses, which will be critical to the success of a ground-water monitoring program.
Information collected during interim status (see §265.92(b)) can assist in assessing ground-
water quality. When anticipated water quality is unknown, it is prudent initially to use
conservative materials (i.e., the most chemically inert). The "Chemical Resistance Chart"
presented in the 1991-1992 catalog of the Cole-Parmer Instrument Company of Chicago
(Appendix 3) may provide general information regarding the resistance of various well
materials to degradation, although this chart is presumably reporting the effects of reagent
grade chemicals on the various materials. General recommendations regarding the selection
of well casing materials to minimize chemical interactions are presented in Table 10.
Chemical Interference Characteristics
Monitoring well casing and screen materials should not chemically alter ground-water
samples as a result of their sorbing, desorbing, or leaching analytes, especially with respect to
the analytes of concern. If a casing material sorbs selected constituents from the ground
water, those constituents either will not be present in any water quality sample or the
concentration of constituents will be reduced. Additionally, if ground-water chemistry
changes over time, the chemical constituents that were previously sorbed onto the casing may
begin to desorb and/or leach into the ground water. In either situation, the water-quality
samples are not representative.
Sorptive solute-removal processes by interaction with casing materials or filter packs
may reduce actual constituent concentrations below quantitation limits or regulatory
thresholds, resulting in biased contaminant plume delineations, reduced sensitivity of
detection, or false-negative assessments of ground-water contamination (Palmer et al., 1987).
Proper well purging may minimize the impact of sorption or leaching effects; however,
purging efficiency is difficult to document. Effective purging may rarely be achieved if
bailers are used. The effectiveness of purging in minimizing sorption or leaching effects of
well materials will be dependent on the relative rates and magnitudes of these processes in the
borehole, filter pack, wells, and the actual time of sample exposure to the materials.
In the presence of chemically reactive aqueous solutions, certain chemical constituents
can be leached from casing materials. If this occurs, chemical constituents that are not
indicative of formation water quality may be detected in samples collected from the well.
This phenomenon might be considered an indication of possible contamination when the
constituents do not relate to ground-water contamination per se, but rather to water sample
contamination contributed by the well casing material. The selection of a casing material
should therefore consider potential interactions between the casing material and the natural
and human-induced geochemical environment.
November 1992
6-24
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING CHEMICAL INTERACTIONS WITH WELL CASINGS
Best Choices Avojd jf Possible
If Monitoring for: 1st Choice 2nd Choice
Metals PTFE PVC SS304&SS316+
Organics SS 304 PVC Galvanize^! steel
&SS316 and PTFE
Metals & Organics None PVC & PTFE SS304&SS316
* Do not use PTFE for monitoring tetrachloroethylene. PTFE tends to be more sorptive of organics
than PVC. Hydrophobia organics (Log Kow > ~2) are most readily sorbed.
+ Substantial concentrations of metals can be leached from SS if the contact time is 2 hours or
longer.
TABLE 10
November 1992
6-25
-------
With respect to well casings, there have been relatively few systematic studies of
sorption and leaching, other than well-documented reports describing the persistent effects of
PVC solvent cements (Sosebee et al., 1983) and the problems with corrosion of ferrous
casings.
6.2.2 Types of Casing Materials
Casing materials widely available for use in ground-water monitoring wells can be
divided into three categories:
1) Fluoropolymer materials, including polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE),
tetrafluoroethylene (TFE), fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP),
perfluoroalkoxy (PFA), and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF);
2) Metallic materials, including carbon steel, low-carbon steel, galvanized steel,
and stainless steel (304 and 316); and
3) Thermoplastic materials, including polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene (ABS).
In addition to these three categories that are widely used, fiberglass-reinforced plastic
(FRP) has been used for monitoring applications. Because FRP has not yet been used in
general application across the country, very little data are available on their characteristics and
performance. Gillham and O'Hannesin (1990) examined sorption of dissolved aromatics
(ppm levels) by epoxy-impregnated fiberglass. Generally, fiberglass was more sorptive of
these compounds than rigid PVC but less sorptive than PTFE. Fiberglass-reinforced materials
are not included in the following discussion. However, owners/operators may conduct
technically-based comparative studies between new well construction materials and standard
alternatives (e.g., PVC, stainless steel, and PTFE) on a site-specific basis to demonstrate
performance of well materials.
All well construction materials possess strength-related characteristics and chemical
resistance/chemical interference characteristics that influence their performance in site-specific
hydrogeologic and contaminant-related monitoring situations. The characteristics for each of
the three categories of materials are discussed below.
Fluoropolymer Materials
Fluoropolymers are synthetic materials consisting of different formulations of
monomers (organic molecules) that can be molded by powder metallurgy techniques or
extruded while heated. Fluoropolymers are technically included among the thermoplastics,
but possess a unique set of properties that distinguish them from other thermoplastics:
fluoropolymers are resistant to chemical and biological attack, oxidation, weathering, and
November 1992
6-26
-------
ultraviolet radiation; they have a broad useful temperature range (up to 550°F) and a high
dielectric constant; they exhibit a low coefficient of friction; they have anti-stick properties;
and they possess a greater coefficient of thermal expansion than most other plastics and
metals.
A variety of fluoropolymer materials are marketed under a number of different
trademarks. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) was discovered by E. I. Du Pont de Nemours in
1938. PTFE's properties include an extreme temperature range (from -400°F to +550°F in
constant service) and the lowest coefficient of friction of any solid material (Hamilton, 1985).
PTFE is by far the most widely-used and produced fluoropolymer. Fluorinated ethylene
propylene (FEP) was also developed by E. I. Du Pont de Nemours and is perhaps the second
most widely used fluoropolymer. It duplicates nearly all of the physical properties of PTFE
except the upper temperature range, which is 100°F lower. Production of FEP-finished
products is generally faster because FEP is melt-processible, but raw material costs are higher.
Perfluoroalkoxy (PFA) combines the best properties of PTFE and FEP, but PFA costs
substantially more than either PTFE or FEP. Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) is tougher and
has a higher abrasion resistance than other fluoropolymers, and is resistant to radioactive
environments. PVDF also has a lower maximum temperature limit than either PTFE or PFA.
Care should be exercised in the use of trade names to identify fluoropolymers. Some
manufacturers use one trade name to refer to several of their own different materials. For
example, Du Pont refers to several of its fluorocarbon resins as Teflon®, although the actual
products have different physical properties and different fabricating techniques. These
materials may not always be interchangeable in service or performance.
Aller et al. (1989) provide an excellent summary of the research on PTFE materials
performed by Hamilton (1985), Reynolds and Gillham (1985), Barcelona et al. (1985a), Lang
et al. (1989), Dablow et al. (1988), and Barcelona et al. (1985b). The following advantages
and disadvantages of PTFE are highlighted in Aller et al.'s (1989) summary and by Nielsen
and Schalla (1991).
Advantages of PTFE well casing and screen materials:
Can be used under a wide range of temperatures;
Inert to attack by the environment, acids, and solvents;
Fairly easily machined, molded, or extruded;
Most inert casing for monitoring metals; and
In terms of chemical inertness, best overall choice if only metallic analytes are
of concern (Hewitt, 1992).
November 1992
6-27
-------
Disadvantages of PTFE well casing and screen materials:
May sorb/desorb organic constituents from/into solution;
Only slotted casing is available for screens;
Ductile behavior of PTFE ("creep" or "cold flow") may result in the partial
closing of well intake openings (i.e., screen slots);
PTFE's extreme flexibility may result in non-plumb and bowed wells;
Non-stick nature of PTFE may cause annular seal failure;
Moderate weight and low strength per unit length;
PTFE casing and screen is unsuitable for driven wells; and
Higher cost relative to stainless steel and PVC.
Structural strength of screen materials is primarily a problem only with PTFE screen
materials, which are affected by a phenomenon known as "creep" or "cold flow." Under
constant stress through time, such as continuous loading of the entire length of casing, PTFE
can deform plastically (i.e., it retains the deformed shape after the stress is removed), and in
screened casings made of PTFE, the result can be partial or complete closure of the slots, thus
effectively ruining the well's usefulness for monitoring purposes. This is a problem,
however, only when the wells are relatively deep (250 feet or deeper); in shallow wells the
physical resistance of PTFE to compression is greater than is its tendency to deform
plastically (Du Pont, reference 1).
If PTFE is to be used in deeper wells, structural strength problems can be avoided by
using slightly larger slots; larger slots may be narrowed slightly because of cold flow,
however they will not be completely sealed shut. It also may be possible to obtain PTFE
casing that has been modified by the use of fillers. Fillers can be used to increase the
resistance to cold flow by approximately a factor of 2 (Du Pont, reference 1), thus limiting
the deformation that will occur in the screened casing. More information about "cold flow"
phenomena is available from the manufacturer (Du Pont, reference 2).
Metallic Materials
Metallic well casing and screen materials available for use in monitoring wells include
carbon steel, low carbon steel, galvanized steel, and stainless steel. Well casings and screens
made of any of these metallic materials are generally stronger, more rigid, and less
temperature-sensitive than thermoplastics, fluoropolymer, or fiberglass-reinforced epoxy
November 1992
6-28
-------
casing materials. The strength and rigidity of metallic casing materials are sufficient to
withstand virtually any subsurface condition encountered in a ground-water monitoring
situation, but metallic materials may be subject to corrosion during long-term exposure in
certain subsurface geochemical environments.
Corrosion is defined as the weakening or destruction of a material by chemical action.
Corrosion of metallic well casings and well intakes can both limit the useful life of the
monitoring well installation and result in ground-water sample analytical bias. It is important,
therefore, to select both casing and screen that are made from corrosion-resistant materials.
Several well-defined forms of corrosive attack on metallic materials have been
observed. In all forms, corrosion proceeds by electrochemical action, and water in contact
with the metal is an essential factor. According to Driscoll (1986), the forms of corrosion
typical in environments where well casing and well intake materials are installed include:
General oxidation or "rusting" of the metallic surface, resulting in uniform
destruction of the surface with occasional perforation in some areas;
Selective corrosion (dezincification) or loss of one element of an alloy, leaving
a structurally weakened material;
Bi-metallic corrosion, caused by the creation of a galvanic cell at or near the
juncture of two different metals;
Pitting corrosion, or highly-localized corrosion by pitting or perforation, with
little loss of metal outside of these areas; and
Stress corrosion, or corrosion induced in areas where the metal is highly
stressed.
To determine the potential for corrosion of metallic materials, the natural geochemical
conditions should first be determined. The following list of indicators can help recognize
potentially corrosive conditions (modified from Driscoll, 1986):
Low pH — if ground-water pH is less than 7.0, water is acidic and corrosive
conditions exist;
High dissolved oxygen content — if dissolved oxygen content exceeds 2
milligrams per liter, corrosive water is indicated;
Presence of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) — presence of H2S in quantities as low as 1
milligram per liter can cause severe corrosion;
November 1992
6-29
-------
Total dissolved solids (TDS) — if TDS is greater than 1000 milligrams per liter,
the electrical conductivity of the water is great enough to cause serious
electrolytic corrosion;
Carbon dioxide (CO2) — corrosion is likely if the CO2 content of the water
exceeds 50 milligrams per liter; and
Chloride (Cl"), bromide (Br"), and fluoride (F) content — if the Cl", Br", and F"
concentrations together exceed 500 milligrams per liter, corrosion can be
expected.
Combinations of any of these corrosive conditions generally increase the corrosive effect.
Carbon steels were produced primarily to provide increased resistance to atmospheric
corrosion. Achieving this increased resistance requires that the material be subjected to
alternately wet and dry conditions. In most monitoring wells, water fluctuations are not
sufficient in either duration or occurrence to provide the conditions that minimize corrosion.
Therefore, the difference between the corrosion resistance of carbon and low-carbon steels in
the unsaturated or in the saturated zone is negligible, and both materials may be expected to
corrode approximately equally.
Corrosion products include iron, manganese, and trace metal oxides as well as various
metal sulfides (Barcelona et al., 1983). Under oxidizing conditions, the principal products are
solid hydrous metal oxides; under reducing conditions, high concentrations of dissolved
metallic corrosion products can be expected (Barcelona et al., 1983). While the electroplating
process of galvanizing improves the corrosion resistance of either carbon or low-carbon steel,
in many subsurface environments the improvement is only slight and short-term. The
products of corrosion of galvanized steel include iron, manganese, zinc, and traces of
cadmium (Barcelona et al., 1983).
The presence of corrosion products represents a high potential for the alteration of
ground-water sample chemical quality. The surfaces where corrosion occurs also present
potential sites for a variety of chemical reactions and adsorption. These surface interactions
can cause significant changes in dissolved metal or organic compounds in ground-water
samples (Marsh and Lloyd, 1980). According to Barcelona et al. (1983), even purging the
well prior to sampling may not be sufficient to minimize this source of sample bias because
the effects of the disturbance of surface coatings or accumulated corrosion products in the
bottom of the well are difficult, if not impossible, to predict. On the basis of these
observations, the use of carbon steel, low-carbon steel, and galvanized steel in monitoring
well construction is not recommended in most natural geochemical environments.
Several different types of stainless steel alloys are available. The most common alloys
used for well casing and screen are Type 304 and Type 316. Type 304 stainless steel is
November 1992
6-30
-------
perhaps the most practical from a corrosion resistance and cost standpoint. It is composed of
slightly more than 18 percent iron and not more than 0.08 percent carbon (Driscoll, 1986).
Chromium and nickel give the Type 304 alloy resistance to corrosion; the low carbon content
improves weldability. Type 316 stainless steel is compositionally similar to Type 304 with
one exception — Type 316 has a 2 to 3 percent molybdenum content and a higher nickel
content that replaces the equivalent percentage of iron. This compositional difference
provides Type 316 stainless steel with an improved resistance to sulfur-containing compounds
and sulfuric acid solutions (Barcelona et al., 1983). Type 316 generally performs better than
Type 304 under reducing conditions.
For either formulation of stainless steel, exposure to corrosive conditions may result in
corrosion and the subsequent contamination of samples by metals such as chromium or
nickel. According to Barcelona et al. (1983), Type 316 stainless steel is less susceptible to
pitting or pinhole corrosion caused by organic acids or halide solutions. However,
Laboratory studies by Hewitt (1989) and Parker et al. (1990) showed that rusting began
within 1 to 2 days for pieces of both Type 304 and Type 316 casings exposed to well water
with high dissolved oxygen. Recent work by Barcelona and Helfrich (1986, 1988) and
Barcelona et al. (1988a) suggests that biological activity may alter geochemistry near stainless
steel wells. Iron bacteria, which oxidize ferrous iron to ferric iron, can cause encrustation of
any type of casing material, including PVC or PTFE, if the water contains ferrous iron
(Lloyde and Heathcote, 1985). Encrustation can lead to failure of the screen due to blockage
(Lloyde and Heathcote, 1985). Under anaerobic conditions, sulfate-reducing bacteria can
actively cause corrosion of stainless steel (Lloyde and Heathcote, 1985).
The following advantages and disadvantages of stainless steel are highlighted by Aller
et al. (1989) and by Nielsen and Schalla (1991):
Advantages of stainless steel well casing and screen materials:
High strength in wide range of temperatures;
Readily available;
High open area screens available;
Suitable for driven wells;
Not degraded by organic solvents;
Low potential for sorption of organic compounds; and
Best material for monitoring trace-level organics.
November 1992
6-31
-------
Disadvantages of stainless steel well casing and screen materials:
May corrode under some geochemical and microbiological conditions;
May sorb cations and anions;
May contribute metal ions (iron, chromium, nickel, manganese) to ground-
water samples;
High weight per unit length; and
Type 304 and Type 316 stainless steel are unsuitable for use when monitoring
for inorganic constituents.
Thermoplastic Materials
Thermoplastics are human-made materials that are composed of different formulations
of large organic molecules. These formulations soften by heating and harden upon cooling,
and therefore, can be easily molded or extruded into a wide variety of useful shapes including
well casings, screens, fittings and accessories. The most common types of thermoplastic well
casings and screens are polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS).
PVC plastics are produced by combining PVC resin with various types of stabilizers,
lubricants, pigments, fillers, plasticizers and processing aids. The amounts of these additives
can be varied to produce different PVC plastics with properties tailored to specific
applications.
PVC materials are classified according to ASTM standard specification D-1785, which
covers rigid PVC compounds (ASTM, 1986). This standard categorizes rigid PVC by
numbered cells designating value ranges for certain pertinent properties and characteristics,
including: impact strength, tensile strength, rigidity (modulus of elasticity), temperature
resistance (deflection temperature), and chemical resistance. ASTM standard specification
F-480 covers thermoplastic water well casing pipe and couplings made in standard dimension
ratios. This standard specifies that PVC well casing can be made from only a limited number
of cell classification materials, predominantly PVC 12454-B, but also including PVC 12454-C
and PVC 14333-C and D (American Society for Testing and Materials, 1981).
ABS plastics are produced from three different monomers: 1) acrylonitrile, 2)
butadiene, and 3) styrene. The ratio of the components and the way that they are combined
can be varied to produce plastics with a wide range of properties. Acrylonitrile contributes
rigidity, impact strength, hardness, chemical resistance, and heat resistance; butadiene
contributes impact strength; styrene contributes rigidity, gloss, and ease of manufacturing
(National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). The ABS used for well
November 1992
6-32
-------
casing is a rigid, strong unplasticized polymer formulation that has good heat resistance and
impact strength.
Two ABS material types are used for well casings: 1) a higher strength, high rigidity,
moderate impact resistance ABS, and 2) a lower strength and rigidity, high impact strength
ABS. These two materials are identified as cell class 434 and 533, respectively, by ASTM
standard specification F-480 (American Society for Testing and Materials, 1981). High
temperature resistance and the ability of ABS to better retain other properties at high
temperatures are advantages in wells where grouting with cement results in high temperature
caused by the cement's heat of hydration.
Aller et al. (1989) describe some of the research that has been performed regarding
degradation of thermoplastic materials and the adsorption/desorption of contaminants
onto/from various thermoplastic materials. The potential sources of chemical interference
from thermoplastic well casing materials, either from desorption or chemical degradation, are
1) the basic monomers from which the casing is made (e.g., vinyl chloride monomer), and 2)
a variety of additives that may be used in the manufacture of the casing, including:
plasticizers, stabilizers (e.g., PVC heat stabilizing compounds such as dimethyl tin and dibutyl
tin), fillers, pigments, and lubricants. The significance and impact of these sources of
chemical interference is not currently known, and may vary based on site-specific conditions.
With respect to chemical interference effects, Aller et al. (1989) explain that another potential
area of concern is the possibility that some chemicals could be sorbed by PVC well casing
materials. Studies regarding sorption of chemical species onto PVC are inconclusive with
respect to both the significance of contaminant sorption by PVC and the ability of well
purging to correct any sample interferences.
The following advantages and disadvantages of PVC materials are highlighted in Aller
et al.'s (1989) discussion and by Nielsen and Schalla (1991).
Advantages of PVC well casing and screen materials:
Completely resistant to galvanic and electrochemical corrosion;
Lightweight for ease of installation;
High abrasion resistance;
Requires low maintenance;
Flexible and workable for ease of cutting and joining;
High strength and low weight per unit length;
November 1992
6-33
-------
Readily available;
Lower cost than PTFE or metallic casing materials;
High open area screens available; and
Potentially best "compromise choice" when monitoring for low concentrations
of both organic and inorganic constituents (Parker et al., 1990; Hewitt, 1992).
Disadvantages of PVC well casing and screen materials:
May degrade in high concentrations of certain organic solvents, especially low
molecular weight ketones, amines, aldehydes, and chlorinated alkenes and
alkanes (Barcelona et al., 1983 and the Science Advisory Board of the
USEPA);
May fail if subjected to high differential pressures (i.e., during surging); weaker
and less rigid than metallic casing materials;
May fail if subjected to high temperatures (i.e., during grouting with neat
cement);
Long-term exposures of some formulations of thermoplastics to the ultraviolet
rays of direct sunlight (above-ground portions of casings) and/or to low
temperatures may cause brittleness and gradual loss of impact strength that may
be significant; and
Unsuitable for driven wells.
The National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) has set specifications for certain chemical
constituents in PVC formulations. The purpose of these specifications as outlined in NSF
Standard 14 (National Sanitation Foundation, 1988) is to control the amount of chemical
additives in both PVC well casing and pipe used for potable water supply. Most of the
maximum contaminant levels correspond to those set by the Safe Drinking Water Act for
chemical constituents covered by the national Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards.
Only PVC products that carry either the "NSF we" (well casing) or "NSF pw" (potable water)
designation have met the specifications set forth in Standard 14. Other non-NSF listed
products may contain chemical additives not addressed by the specifications, or may contain
concentrations of the listed chemicals that are higher than permitted by the specifications. In
all cases, the material used should have been demonstrated to be compatible with the specific
applications. For example, even though neither lead nor cadmium have been permitted as a
compounding ingredient in United States-manufactured NSF-listed PVC well casing since
November 1992
6-34
-------
1970, PVC manufactured in other countries may be stabilized with lead or cadmium
compounds that may leach from the PVC (Barcelona et al., 1983).
Composite Alternative Materials
In certain conditions it may be advantageous to design a well using more than one
material for well components. For example, where stainless steel or fluoropolymer materials
are preferred in a specific chemical environment, costs may be saved by using PVC in
non-critical portions of the well. These savings may be considerable, especially in deep wells
where only the lower portion of the well has a critical chemical environment, and where tens
of feet of lower-cost PVC may be used in the upper portion of the well. In a composite well
design, dissimilar metallic components should not be used unless an electrically-isolating
design is incorporated (i.e., a dielectric coupling) (USEPA, 1986).
Conclusions
The available open and limited-distribution literature on materials used in well
construction and sampling equipment for ground-water quality monitoring strongly suggest
that well casing and screen material selection should be made carefully to prevent serious
errors in analytical results. When performance studies (laboratory or field) are conducted by
the owner or operator to demonstrate the appropriateness of a particular casing material, the
studies should demonstrate chemical sorption characteristics, physical strength, and
manufacturing tolerances on the inner diameter of the casing, at a minimum. Table 11
provides a summary of recommendations for the use of certain well casing materials under
various physical and geochemical conditions which may be encountered.
The Agency discourages the practice of selecting well construction materials based on
historical preference, unless supporting scientific studies or field data collected from facilities
located in similar hydrogeologic settings and with similar wastes justify the preference.
Consideration should be given to site specific factors such as: ground-water geochemistry,
chemical characteristics of present or potential contaminants, structural integrity and chemical
resistance of the well construction material, and site-specific comparative performance studies
of various materials. In all cases, the Regional Administrator has the authority (40 CFR
§270.32(b) and §3005(c)(3) of RCRA) to make the final determination regarding the
appropriate well casing and screening materials for RCRA ground-water monitoring systems.
Facilities may need to use combinations of screen and casing materials (either as a composite
or independently) in a ground-water monitoring network, depending upon what constituents
the wells will sample. Further, the owner or operator may need to conduct site-specific
comparative performance studies to justify their preference for a particular well casing or
screening material.
November 1992
6-35
-------
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SELECTION OF WELL CASING MATERIALS
Do Not Use:
Use:
1. PTFE if well depth exceeds 225-375' (68.6-114m).
2. PVC or ABS if well depth exceeds 1200-2000'
(366-610m).
3. SSifpH<7.0.
4. SS if D.O. > 2 ppm.
5. SS if H2S > 1 ppm.
6. SS if T.D.S. > 1000 ppm.
7. SS if CO2 > 50 ppm.
8. SS if CI" > 500 ppm.
9. PVC if a neat PVC solvent/softening agent* is
present or if the aqueous concentration of the PVC
solvent/softening agent exceeds 0.25 times its
solubility in water.
10. Solvent bonded joints for PVC casings.
11. Welded stainless joints.
12. Any PVC well casing that is not NSF-ASTM
approved - D-1785 and F-480.
13. Any stainless steel casing that is not ASTM
approved -A312.
14. Any ABS well casing that is not ASTM approved.
PVC, ABS, SS.
SS.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
PVC, ABS, or PTFE.
SS, PTFE.
Threaded PVC casings.
Threaded SS casings.
ASTM-NSF approved PVC well
casings - D-1785 and F-480.
ASTM approved SS 304 and
SS 316 casings - A312.
ASTM approved ABS casings -
F-480.
Known PVC solvents/softening agents include:
Tetrahydrofuran, cyclohexane, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, methylene chloride,
trichloromethane, 1,1-dichloroethane, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, benzene, toluene,
acetone, and tetrachloroethylene.
TABLE 11
November 1992
6-36
-------
6.2.3 Coupling Procedures for Joining Casing
Only a limited number of methods are available for joining lengths of casing or casing
and screen together. The joining method depends on the type of casing and type of casing
joint. Flush-joint, threaded flush-joint, plain square-end, and bell-end casing joints are typical
of joints available for plastic casing; threaded flush-joint, bell-end, and plain square-end
casing joints are typical of joints available for metallic casing.
Metallic Casing Joining
There are generally two options available for joining metallic well casings: 1) welding
via application of heat, or 2) threaded joints. Both methods produce a casing string with a
relatively smooth inner and outer diameter. With welding, it is possible to produce joints that
are as strong or stronger than the casing, thereby enhancing the tensile strength of the casing
string. The disadvantages of welding include: 1) greater assembly time, 2) difficulty in
properly welding casing in the vertical position, 3) enhancement of corrosion potential in the
vicinity of the weld, and 4) danger of ignition of potentially explosive gases that may be
present.
Because of the disadvantages of welding, it is recommended that threaded joints be
used with metallic casing and screen. Threaded joints provide inexpensive, fast, and
convenient connections and greatly reduce potential problems with chemical resistance or
interference (due to corrosion) and explosive potential. Wrapping the male threads with
fluoropolymer tape prior to joining sections improves the watertightness of the joint. One
disadvantage to using threaded joints is that the tensile strength of the casing string is reduced
to approximately 70 percent of the casing strength. This reduction in strength does not
usually pose a problem because strength requirements for small diameter wells (such as
typical monitoring wells) are not as critical and because metallic casing has a high initial
tensile strength.
Thermoplastic and Fluoropolymer Casing Joining
The most common method of mechanical joining of thermoplastic and fluoropolymer
casing and screen is by threaded connections. Molded and machined threads are available in
a variety of thread configurations including: acme, buttress, standard pipe thread, and square
threads. Because most manufacturers have their own thread type, threaded casing may not be
compatible between manufacturers. If the threads do not match and a joint is made, the joint
can fail or leak either during or after casing installation.
Casing with threads machined or molded directly onto the pipe (without use of
larger-diameter couplings) provides a flush joint between inner and outer diameters. Because
the annular space is frequently minimal, casings that do not use couplings are best-suited for
use in monitoring well construction. Joints should create a uniform inner and outer casing
November 1992
6-37
-------
diameter in monitoring well installations. An inconsistent inner diameter causes problems
when tight-fitting downhole equipment (development tools, sampling or purging devices, etc.)
is used; an uneven outer diameter creates problems with filter pack and annular seal
placement. The latter problem tends to promote water migration at the casing/seal interface
to a greater degree than is experienced with uniform outer diameter casing (Morrison, 1984).
Because all joints in a monitoring well casing must be watertight, the extent to which
the joints are tightened should comply with recommendations of the manufacturer.
Overtightening casing joints can lead to structural failure of the joint (National Water Well
Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). To maximize the watertightness of the joint
where threaded joints are used, fluoropolymer tape may be wrapped around the threads prior
to joining male and female sections; also, an O-ring may be added for extra security.
Solvent cementing of thermoplastic pipe should not be used in the construction of
ground-water monitoring wells. In solvent cementing, a solvent primer is generally used to
clean the two pieces of casing to be joined and a solvent cement is then spread over the
cleaned surface areas. The two sections are assembled while the cement is wet. This allows
the active solvent agent(s) to penetrate and soften the two casing surfaces that are joined. As
the cement cures, the two pieces of casing are fused together; a residue of chemicals from the
solvent cement remains at the joint. The cements used in solvent welding, which are organic
chemicals, have been show to adversely effect the integrity of ground-water samples. (See
Aller et al., 1989 for a summary of relevant research.)
6.2.4 Well Casing Diameter
While casing outside diameters are standardized, variations in wall thickness can cause
casing inside diameters to vary. In "scheduled" casing, wall thickness increases as the
scheduling number increases for any given diameter of casing. Nominal 2-inch casing is a
standard 2.375 inches outside diameter; wall thicknesses vary from 0.065 inch for schedule 5
to 0.218 inch for schedule 80. This means that inside diameters for nominal 2-inch casings
vary from 2.245 inches for schedule 5 thin-walled casings (typically of stainless steel) to only
1.939 inches for schedule 80 thick-walled casings (typically of PVC). Wall thickness also
changes with pipe diameter in scheduling. Because schedule 80 PVC is thicker than schedule
40 PVC, schedule 80 PVC wells will extend the life of the monitoring system compared to
schedule 40 PVC. The cost differential between these two schedules is fairly insignificant.
Another method of evaluating casing strength is by standard dimension ratios (SDR).
A SDR is the ratio of the wall thickness to the casing diameter. The ratio is referenced to an
internal pounds per square inch (psi) pressure rating such that all casings with a similar SDR
will have a similar psi rating. Where strength of casing is important, scheduling and SDR
numbers provide a means for choosing casing.
Although the diameter of the casing for a monitoring well depends on the purpose of
the well, the casing size is generally selected to accommodate downhole equipment.
November 1992
6-38
-------
Additional casing diameter selection criteria include: 1) drilling or well installation method
used, 2) anticipated depth of the well and associated strength requirements, 3) anticipated
method of well development, 4) volume of water required to be purged prior to sampling, 5)
rate of recovery of the well after purging, and 6) anticipated aquifer testing.
6.2.5 Casing Cleaning Requirements
Well casing and screen materials should be cleaned prior to installation to remove any
coatings or manufacturing residues. Prior to use, all casing and screen materials should be
washed with a mild non-phosphate detergent/potable water solution and rinsed with potable
water. Hot pressurized water, such as in steam cleaning, should be used to remove organic
solvents, oils, or lubricants from casing and screens composed of materials other than plastic.
At sites where volatile organic contaminants may be monitored, the cleaning of well casing
and screen materials should include a final rinse with deionized water or potable water that
has not been chlorinated. Once cleaned, casings and screens should be stored in an area that
is free of potential contaminants. Plastic sheeting can generally be used to cover the ground
in the decontamination area to provide protection from contamination. Aller et al. (1989)
describe the procedures that should be used to clean casing and screen materials.
6.3 Well Intake Design
The owner/operator should design and construct the intakes of monitoring wells to (1)
accurately sample the aquifer zone that the well is intended to sample, (2) minimize the
passage of formation materials (turbidity) into the well, and (3) ensure sufficient structural
integrity to prevent the collapse of the intake structure.
6.3.1 Well Screen
The goal of a properly completed monitoring well is to provide low turbidity water
that is representative of ground-water quality in the vicinity of the well. Although wells
completed in rock often do not require screens, the majority of monitoring wells installed for
RCRA purposes are completed in unconsolidated sediments.
6.3.1.1 Screen Length
The selection of screen length usually depends on the objective of the well.
Piezometers and wells where only a discrete flow path is monitored (such as thin gravel
interbedded with clays) are generally completed using short screens (2 feet or less). To avoid
dilution, the Agency prefers that well screens be kept to the minimum length appropriate for
intercepting a contaminant plume, especially in a high-yielding aquifer. The screen length
should generally not exceed 10 feet. If construction of a water table well is the objective,
either for defining gradient or detecting floating phases, then a longer screen is acceptable
because the owner/operator will need to provide a margin of safety that will guarantee that at
November 1992
6-39
-------
least a portion of the screen always contacts the water table regardless of its seasonal
fluctuations. The owner or operator should not employ well intake designs that cut across
hydraulically separated geologic units. Except in settings where DNAPLs may exist, wells
may have a bottom sump to allow sediments that enter the well to settle, preventing "silting
in" of the well. (See Section 5.1.2.3 for further guidance on selecting well screen length.)
6.3.1.2 Screen Slot Size
Well screen slot size should be selected to retain from 90% to 100% of the filter pack
material (discussed below) in artificially filter packed wells, or from 50% to 100% of the
formation material in naturally packed wells, unless the owner/operator can demonstrate that
turbidity-free water (<5 nephelometric turbidity units) can be obtained using a larger slot size.
Although this is a higher percentage than is usually required in a production well, the low
withdrawal rates and the infrequent use of a monitoring well necessitate the higher percentage
exclusion. EPA emphasizes that filtering a sample subsequent to its collection is not the
solution for dealing with turbidity in an improperly designed well. Furthermore, well screens
should be factory-slotted. Manually slotting screens in the field should not be performed
under any circumstances.
6.3.2 Filter Packs/Pack Material
The annular space between the borehole wall and the screen or slotted casing should
be filled in a manner that minimizes the passage of formation materials into the well. The
driller should generally install an artificial filter pack around each well intake. As discussed
above, wells in rock often do not require screens, and thus do not require filter packs.
However, they are the exception; most wells will require filter packs and a screened length of
casing. Aller et al. (1989) provide a comprehensive discussion of the purpose and selection
of filter pack materials.
An artificial filter pack is appropriate in most geologic settings. In particular, an
artificial filter pack should be used when: 1) the natural formation is poorly sorted; 2) a long
screened interval is required and/or the intake spans highly stratified geologic materials of
widely varying grain sizes; 3) the natural formation is a uniform fine sand, silt, or clay; 4) the
natural formation is thin-bedded; 5) the natural formation is poorly cemented sandstone; 6)
the natural formation is highly fractured or characterized by relatively large solution channels;
7) the natural formation is shale or coal that will act as a constant source of turbidity to
ground-water samples; and 8) the diameter of the borehole is significantly greater than the
diameter of the screen (Aller et al., 1989). Using natural formation material as filter pack is
recommended only when the natural formation materials are relatively coarse-grained,
permeable, and uniform in grain size (Aller et al., 1989).
Filter pack material should be chemically inert. The best filter packs are made from
industrial grade glass (quartz) sand or beads (Barcelona, 1985a). Any other type of sand
November 1992
6-40
-------
should be analyzed for cation exchange capacity and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to
determine whether it will interact with analytes of concern in the ground water.
Commercially available pea gravel may be acceptable for use in gravel aquifers; however, to
meet the Agency's requirement that the filter pack be chemically inert, the pea gravel itself
should not be chemically active or coated with a chemically active metal oxide. Filters
constructed from fabric should not be used as they tend to plug and may be chemically
reactive.
The Agency recommends that filter pack material be well rounded and of uniform
grain size. Aller et al. (1989) provide the following summary of methods for selecting the
size of filter pack materials:
"Although design techniques vary, all use the filter pack ratio to establish size
differential between the formation materials and filter pack materials. Generally this
ratio refers to either the average (50 percent retained) grain size of the formation
material or the 70 percent retained size of the formation material. For example,
Walker (1974) and Barcelona et al. (1985a [1985b in this document]) recommend
using a uniform filter pack grain size that is 3 to 5 times the 50 percent retained size
of the formation materials. Driscoll (1986) recommends a more conservative approach
by suggesting that for fine-grained formations, the 50 percent retained size of the
finest formation sample be multiplied by a factor of 2 to exclude the entrance of fine
silts, sands, and clays into the monitoring well. The United States Environmental
Protection Agency (1975) recommends that filter pack grain size be selected by
multiplying the 70 percent retained grain size of the formation materials by a factor
between 4 and 6. A factor of 4 is used if the formation is fine and uniform; a factor
of 6 is used if the formation is coarser and non-uniform. In both cases, the uniformity
coefficient of the filter pack materials should not exceed 2.5 and the gradation of the
filter material should form a smooth and gradual size distribution when plotted. The
actual filter pack used should fall within the area defined by these two curves.
According to Williams (1981), in uniform formation materials, either approach to filter
pack material sizing will provide similar results; however, in coarse, poorly sorted
formation materials, the average grain size method may be misleading and should be
used with discretion."
Filter pack material should be installed in a manner that prevents bridging and
particle-size segregation. Filter pack material installed below the water table should generally
be tremied into the annular space. Allowing filter pack material to fall by gravity (free fall)
into the annular space is only appropriate when wells are relatively shallow, when the filter
pack has a uniform grain size, and when the filter pack material can be poured continuously
into the well without stopping.
At least two inches of filter pack material should be installed between the well screen
and the borehole wall. The filter pack should extend at least two feet above the top of the
November 1992
6-41
-------
well screen, as illustrated in Figure 13. In deep wells, the filter pack may not compress when
initially installed, consequently, when the annular and surface seals are placed on the filter
pack, the filter pack compresses sufficiently to allow grout into, or very close to, the screen.
Consequently, filter packs may need to be installed as high as five feet above the screened
interval in monitoring wells that are deep (i.e., greater than 200 feet). The precise volume of
filter pack material required should be calculated and recorded before placement, and the
actual volume used should be determined and recorded during well construction. Any
significant discrepancy between the calculated volume and the actual volume should be
explained.
Prior to installing the annular seal, a one- to two-foot layer of chemically inert fine
sand may be placed over the filter pack to prevent the intrusion of annular or surface sealants
into the filter pack. When designing monitoring wells, owners and operators should
remember that the entire length of the annular space filled with filter pack material or sand is
effectively the monitored zone. Moreover, if the filter pack/sand extends from the screened
zone into an overlying zone, a conduit for hydraulic connection is created between the two
zones.
6.4 Annular Sealants
Proper sealing of the annular space between the well casing and the borehole wall is
required (§264.97(c)) to prevent contamination of samples and the ground water. Adequate
sealing will prevent hydraulic connection within the well annulus. The materials used for
annular sealants should be chemically inert with the highest anticipated concentration of
chemical constituents expected in the ground water at the facility. In general, the
permeability of the sealing material should be one to two orders of magnitude lower than the
least permeable part of the formation in contact with the well. The precise volume of annular
sealants required should be calculated and recorded before placement, and the actual volume
used should be determined and recorded during well construction. Any significant
discrepancy between the calculated volume and the actual volume should be explained. Aller
et al. (1989) provide detailed discussions of the proper placement of sealants into the annular
space.
When the screened interval is within the saturated zone, a minimum of two feet of
sealant material such as raw (>10% solids) bentonite should be placed immediately over the
protective sand layer overlying the filter pack. Granular bentonite, bentonite pellets, and
bentonite chips may be placed around the casing by means of a tremie pipe in deep wells
(greater than approximately 30 feet deep), or by dropping them directly down the annulus in
shallow wells (less than approximately 30 feet deep). Dropping the bentonite pellets down
the annulus presents a potential for bridging (from premature hydration of the bentonite),
leading to gaps in the seal below the bridge. In shallow monitoring wells, a tamping device
should be used to prevent bridging from occurring.
November 1992
6-42
-------
A neat cement or shrinkage-compensated neat cement grout seal should be installed on
top of the bentonite seal and extend vertically up the annular space between the well casing
and the borehole wall to within a few feet of land surface. Annular sealants in slurry form
(e.g., cement grout, bentonite slurry) should be placed by the tremie/pump (from the bottom
up) method. The bottom of the placement pipe should be equipped with a side discharge
deflector to prevent the slurry from jetting a hole through the protective sand layer, filter
pack, or bentonite seal. The bentonite seal should be allowed to completely hydrate, set, or
cure in conformance with the manufacturer's specifications prior to installing the grout seal in
the annular space. The time required for the bentonite seal to completely hydrate, set, or cure
will differ with the materials used and the specific conditions encountered, but is generally a
minimum of four to twenty-four hours. Allowing the bentonite seal to hydrate, set, or cure
prevents the invasion of the more viscous and more chemically reactive grout seal into the
screened area.
When using bentonite as an annular sealant, the appropriate clay should be selected on
the basis of the environment in which it is to be used, such as the ion-exchange potential of
the sediments, sediment permeability, and compatibility with expected contaminants. Sodium
bentonite is usually acceptable. Other industrial grade clays without chemical additives that
may affect ground-water quality can be used if sodium bentonite is incompatible with either
the natural formation or the analytes of concern (e.g., calcium bentonite may be more
appropriate in calcareous sediments and soils because of its reduced cation exchange
capacity). The sealing properties of clays may be adversely affected by chlorine salts, acids,
alcohols, ketones, and other polar compounds. If these materials are expected at the facility,
alternative sealants should be considered.
When the annular sealant must be installed in the unsaturated zone, EPA recommends
that neat cement or shrinkage-compensated neat cement mixtures be used for the annular
sealant. Bentonite is not recommended as an annular sealant in the unsaturated zone because
the moisture available is insufficient to fully hydrate bentonite. Adding calcium bentonite to
cement should be avoided. Ca++ and OH" ions in the cement cause flocculation of the clay,
reducing its ability to swell. The bentonite also weakens the cement, reducing its
compressive strength. A better solution for shrinkage control is to use
shrinkage-compensating additives components: K, M, and S (ASTM C845). However, the
high heat of hydration should be taken into account when these materials are used.
November 1992
6-43
-------
6.5 Surface Completion
The surface completion of monitoring wells is described in detail by Aller et al.
(1989). In general, completing a monitoring well will involve installing the following
components:
Surface seal;
Protective casing, utility vault, or meter box;
Ventilation hole(s);
Drain hole(s);
Cap;
Lock; and
Guard posts.
Monitoring wells are commonly completed at the surface in one of two ways: as
above-ground completions or as flush-to-ground completions. The purpose of both types of
completion are to prevent infiltration of surface runoff into the well annulus and to prevent
accidental damage or vandalism of the well.
A monitoring well surface seal should be installed on top of the grout seal (Section
6.4) and extend vertically up the well annulus between the well casing and the borehole to the
land surface. Where appropriate, the lower end of the surface seal should extend at least one
foot below the frost line to prevent damage from frost heaving. The composition of the
surface seal should be neat cement or concrete. In above-ground well completions, the
surface seal should form at least a two-foot wide, four-inch thick neat cement or concrete
apron at the land surface. The apron should be constructed with a slight slope to drain
surface water radially away from the well casing to prevent leakage down the outer casing
wall.
A locking protective casing should be installed around the well casing to prevent
damage or unauthorized entry. The protective casing should be anchored below the frost line
(where applicable) into the surface seal and extend at least 18 inches above the surface of the
ground. A 1/4-inch vent hole pipe is recommended to allow the escape of any potentially
explosive gases that may accumulate within the well. In addition, a drain hole should be
installed in the protective casing to prevent water from accumulating and, in freezing
climates, freezing around the well casing. The space between the protective casing and the
well casing may be filled with gravel to allow the retrieval of tools and to prevent small
November 1992
6-44
-------
animal/insect entrance through the drain. A suitable cap should be placed on the well to
prevent tampering or the entry of any foreign materials. A lock should be installed on the
cap to provide security. To prevent corrosion or jamming of the lock, a protective cover
should be used. Care should be taken when using lubricants such as graphite or petroleum-
based sprays to lubricate the lock, as lubricants may introduce a potential for sample
contamination. Locks should not be lubricated on the day the well is sampled, and gloves
that are worn while lubricating the lock should be changed prior to initiating other activities
at the well.
To guard against accidental damage to the well from facility traffic, the
owner/operator should install concrete or steel bumper guards around the edge of the concrete
apron. These should be located within 3 or 4 feet of the well and should be painted orange
or fitted with reflectors to reduce the possibility of vehicular damage.
The use of flush-to-ground surface completions should be avoided because this design
increases the potential for surface water infiltration into the well. In cases where flush-to-
ground completions are unavoidable, such as in active roadways, a protective structure such
as a utility vault or meter box should be installed around the well casing. In addition,
measures should be taken to prevent the accumulation of surface water in the protective
structure and around the well intake. These measures should include outfitting the protective
structure with a steel lid or manhole cover that has a rubber seal or gasket, and ensuring that
the bond between the cement surface seal and the protective structure is watertight.
6.6 Well Surveying
The location of all wells should be surveyed by a licensed professional surveyor (or
equivalent) to determine their X-Y coordinates as well as their distances from the units being
monitored and their distances from each other. A State Plane Coordinate System, Universal
Transverse Mercator System, or Latitude/Longitude should be used, as approved by the
Regional Administrator. The survey should also note the coordinates of any temporary
benchmarks. A surveyed reference mark should be placed on the top of the well casing, not
on the protective casing or the well apron, for use as a measuring point because the well
casing is more stable than the protective casing or well apron (both the protective casing and
the well apron are more susceptible to frost heave and spalling). The height of the reference
survey datum, permanently marked on top of the inner well casing, should be determined
within ±0.01 foot in relation to mean sea level, which in turn is established by reference to an
established National Geodetic Vertical Datum. The reference marked on top of inner well
casings should be resurveyed at least once every 5 years, unless changes in ground-water flow
patterns/direction, or damage caused by freeze/thaw or desiccation processes, are noted. In
such cases, the Regional Administrator may require that well casings be resurveyed on a more
frequent basis.
November 1992
6-45
-------
6.7 Well Development
All monitoring wells should be developed to create an effective filter pack around the
well screen, to rectify damage to the formation caused by drilling, to remove fine particles
from the formation near the borehole, and to assist in restoring the natural water quality of
the aquifer in the vicinity of the well. Development stresses the formation around the screen,
as well as the filter pack, so that mobile fines, silts, and clays are pulled into the well and
removed. The process of developing a well creates a graded filter pack around the well
screen. Development is also used to remove any foreign materials (drilling water, muds, etc.)
that may have been introduced into the well borehole during drilling and well installation, and
to aid in the equilibration that will occur between the filter pack, well casing, and the
formation water.
The development of a well is extremely important to ensuring the collection of
representative ground-water samples. If the well has been properly completed, then adequate
development should remove fines that may enter the well either from the filter pack or the
formation. This improves the yield, but more importantly it creates a monitoring well capable
of producing samples of acceptably low turbidity. Turbid samples from an improperly
constructed and developed well may interfere with subsequent analyses.
When development is initiated, a wide range of grain sizes of the natural material is
drawn into the well, and the well typically produces very turbid water. However, as pumping
continues and the natural materials are drawn into the filter pack, an effective filter will form
through a sorting process. Inducing movement of ground water into the well (i.e., in one
direction) generally results in bridging of the particles. A means of inducing flow reversal is
necessary to break down bridges and produce a stable filter.
The common methods for developing wells are described by Aller et al. (1989) and
Driscoll (1986) and include:
Pumping and overpumping;
Backwashing;
Surging with a surge block;
Bailing;
Jetting;
Airlift pumping; and
Air surging.
November 1992
6-46
-------
Aller et al. (1989) provide a detailed overview of well development and should be consulted
when evaluating well development methods. Overall, the most effective and efficient method
available for inducing flow reversal during well development is the careful use of a properly-
constructed surge block. To be effective, the surge block may need to be lifted and lowered
throughout the well screened interval for several hours, with periodic pumping or bailing of
the fines. Bailers and pumps also have been used successfully to develop wells; however,
depending on the depth of the water, the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer, and the
diameter of the well, pumping may effectively achieve well development.
The following is a general procedure for developing a well by surging and pumping of
fines:
1. Record the static water level and total well depth.
2. Set the pump and record the pumping rate. Pump until turbidity reaches the
desired level as measured using a turbidity meter.
3. Discontinue pumping and begin surging using a properly designed surge block
and proper surging technique.
4. Measure and record well depth to determine the amount of fines, and repeat
Step 2. If the well has been properly designed, the amount of pumping
required to achieve the desired turbidity level will be substantially less than the
amount of pumping required during the first pumping cycle.
5. Repeat surging and pumping until the well yields water of acceptable turbidity
at the beginning of a pumping cycle. A good way to ensure that development
is complete is to shut the pump off during the last anticipated pumping cycle,
leaving the pump in place, and re-start it at a later time. The turbidity of the
discharge water should remain low.
Effective and efficient well development is possible only with adequate flow rate
during water withdrawal. Additionally, any fines that have been drawn into the well should
be removed to the greatest degree possible. Therefore, the Agency recommends that one of
the following pumping methods, listed in the order of preference, be used in conjunction with
a properly designed surge block:
1. Centrifugal pump capable of removing fines if the water level is within
suction-lift distance.
2. Electric submersible pump capable of pumping fines.
November 1992
6-47
-------
3. Properly designed and operated air-lift system (requires prior approval of the
Regional Administrator).
Well development methods and equipment that alter the chemical composition of the
ground water should not be used. Development methods that involve adding water (including
water pumped from the well) or other fluids to the well or borehole, or that use air to
accomplish well development, are rarely permissible. Consequently, methods that are
unsuitable in most cases for monitoring well development include backwashing, jetting, airlift
pumping, and air surging. Approval should be obtained from the Regional Administrator
prior to introducing air, water, or other fluids into the well for the purpose of well
development. Any water introduced into the well during well development should be
chemically analyzed to determine its potential impact on water quality. The well
development methods that will generally be approved by EPA are bailing, surging with a
surge block, pumping, overpumping, or combinations of these methods. Airlift pumping may
be approved if the owner/operator can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Regional
Administrator that appropriate measures will be taken to prevent air contact with the
formation, and to prevent the entry of compressor oils into the well. Monitoring wells should
not be developed before well sealant materials have set or cured.
Ground water should be collected and measured for turbidity periodically during well
development, and at the completion of well development. The final turbidity measurement
should be recorded on the well construction log. If a well yields turbid samples (turbidity
greater than or equal to 5 NTUs) after development, the procedures shown in Figure 14
should be followed. A well that cannot be developed to the point of producing low turbidity
water (e.g., <5 NTUs) may be considered by the Agency to have been improperly completed
(e.g., mismatched formation materials/filter pack/screen slot size) depending on the geologic
materials in which the well is screened. If a well is not producing low turbidity ground-water
samples, the owner/operator should demonstrate to the satisfaction of the appropriate
regulatory agency that proper well completion and development measures have been
employed, and that the turbidity is an artifact of the geologic materials in which the well is
screened, and not the result of improper well construction or development. Failure to make
such a demonstration could result in a determination by the Agency that the well must be re-
drilled.
The Agency emphasizes that proper well construction and development procedures, as
well as proper sampling procedures (e.g., selection of appropriate well purging and sampling
rates), are necessary to yield ground-water samples that are representative of ambient water
quality. The Agency recognizes that ground water in some wells (both high and low yield) in
fractured rock or karst aquifers may become muddy after periods of rainfall, even though
during fair weather the water is free of turbidity. Careful attention to proper well installation
and development should be exercised with wells completed in very silty geologic units.
Information obtained from any aquifer tests conducted on the well should be used to establish
November 1992
6-48
-------
ground-water
Is
well
located in karst
terrane characteriz
by turbulent
ground-water
flow?
Turbidity
<5 NTUs?
Are
purge rates;
YES/finer pack size,XYES
and screen size
appropriate?
Was well
sufficiently
developed?
Resample well
at rate <1 L/min
Inform Regional
or State office
Turbidity
<5 NTUs?
Turbidity
<5 NTUs?
DECISION CHART FOR TURBID GROUND-WATER SAMPLES
FIGURE 14
November 1992
6-49
-------
the initial yield of the well, and these data can be used for periodic redevelopment and
maintenance assessments.
If well drilling, installation, or completion have altered ground-water quality
chemically in the vicinity of the well, well development should aid in restoring ground-water
quality within the well to natural ground-water quality. The ability of a well development
method to remove clays from the sides of the borehole should be considered, because clays
retained in the borehole may alter the chemical composition of ground water in the well. The
Agency recommends periodically monitoring ground water during well development for water
quality parameters such as specific conductance and pH. The reproducibility of water quality
results provides some indication that ground-water chemistry in the well has been restored to
natural quality. In general, the Agency also recommends that the volume of water introduced
into the well during well drilling, installation, and completion be withdrawn from the well
during well development. The volume of water withdrawn from a well during development
should be recorded.
6.8 Documentation of Well Design, Construction, and Development
Information on the design, construction, and development of each well should be
compiled. Such information should include: (1) a boring log that documents well drilling
and associated sampling, and includes the minimum required information presented in Table 3
and Section 4.2.1; and (2) a well construction log and well construction diagram ("as built").
The well construction log and well construction diagram should present the following
information (including dimensions, as appropriate):
Well name/number;
Date/time of well construction;
Borehole diameter and well casing diameter;
Well depth (±0.1 ft);
Casing length;
Casing materials;
Casing and screen joint type;
Screened interval(s);
Screen materials;
November 1992
6-50
-------
Screen slot size/design;
Filter pack material and size;
Filter pack volume (calculated and actual);
Filter pack placement method;
Annular sealant composition;
Annular seal placement method;
Annular sealant volume (calculated and actual);
Surface sealant composition;
Surface seal placement method;
Surface sealant volume (calculated and actual);
Surface seal and well apron design/construction;
Well development procedure and ground-water turbidity measured at the
completion of well development;
Type and design/construction of protective casing;
Well cap and lock;
Ground surface elevation (±0.01 ft);
Survey reference point elevation (±0.01 ft) on well casing;
Top of monitoring well casing elevation (±0.01 ft); and
Top of protective steel casing elevation (±0.01 ft).
The owner/operator should document that the following well completion activities
were performed appropriately:
Selection of construction materials for the casing and screen;
Selection of the well diameter, screen length, and screen slot size;
November 1992
6-51
-------
Selection and emplacement of the appropriate filter pack;
Selection and emplacement of the annular sealants;
Providing proper security of the well;
Surveying the locations and elevations of the tops of the casings; and
Adequately developing the well.
All documents pertaining to the design, construction, and development of RCRA
monitoring wells should be kept by the owner/operator in the facility operating record and
submitted as part of the operating permit.
6.9 Specialized Well Designs
There are two cases where special monitoring well designs should be used:
Where the owner/operator has chosen to use dedicated pumps to withdraw
ground-water samples; or,
Where separate low density and/or high density immiscible liquid phases may
be present.
Dedicated pumps should be fluorocarbon resin or stainless steel positive gas
displacement bladder pumps, or equivalent devices approved by the Regional Administrator.
The design of the dedicated sampling system should allow access to the well for the purpose
of conducting aquifer tests, maintaining the well (e.g., redevelopment procedures), and making
water level measurements. Dedicated sampling systems should be periodically inspected to
ensure that the equipment is functioning reliably. Samples should be withdrawn from the
system to evaluate the operation of the equipment, and the equipment should be checked for
damage.
Where light and dense-phase immiscible layers are present, or are determined to
potentially occur after considering the waste types managed at the facility, specialized well
systems should be designed to allow collection of discrete samples of both the light and dense
phases. In certain cases, well screens that extend from above the water table to the lower
confining layer may be appropriate, but more frequently the presence of immiscible phases
will require that well clusters (or nests) or multilevel sampling devices be installed. Where
well clusters are employed, one well in the cluster may be screened at horizons where floaters
are expected, and another may be screened at horizons where dense phases are expected.
Other wells may be screened within other portions of the aquifer.
November 1992
6-52
-------
6.10 Evaluation of Existing Wells
Existing monitoring wells should meet the performance standards presented in 40 CFR
Part 264 Subpart F, as determined by the Regional Administrator. There are two situations in
particular where wells may fail to meet the performance standards: (1) where existing wells
are physically damaged; and (2) where the owner/operator can produce little or no
documentation of how existing wells were designed and installed.
Wells that are physically damaged, or wells for which there is not sufficient
documentation of design and construction, may need to be replaced. In addition, wells that
produce consistently turbid samples (>5 NTUs) and were not properly designed or constructed
also may warrant replacement. In such cases, knowledge of site hydrogeology and
professional judgment should be used in deciding when to replace wells.
When there is a question regarding whether or not the well casing material is
negatively affecting the chemical quality of the ground-water samples, a side-by-side
comparison at selected wells should be undertaken using the well construction materials in
question. If analytical results are comparable, then it is likely that chemical bias is not a
major issue at the time of the test.
When existing wells do not meet the performance standards, the wells should be
properly decommissioned and, if required by the Regional Administrator, replaced. Pursuant
to §264.97(c)(l), the design, installation, development, and decommissioning of any
monitoring wells, piezometers and other measurement, sampling, and analytical devices must
be documented in the operating record.
6.11 Decommissioning Ground-Water Monitoring Wells and Boreholes
Ground-water contamination resulting from improperly decommissioned wells and
boreholes is a serious concern. Any borehole that will not be completed as a monitoring well
should be properly decommissioned. The USEPA (1975) and the American Water Works
Association (1985) provide the following reasons, summarized by Aller et al. (1989), as to
why improperly constructed or unused wells should be properly decommissioned:
To eliminate physical hazards;
To prevent ground-water contamination;
To conserve aquifer yield and hydrostatic head; and
To prevent intermixing of subsurface water.
November 1992
6-53
-------
Should an owner or operator have a borehole or an improperly constructed or unused
well at his or her facility, the well or borehole should be decommissioned in accordance with
specific guidelines. Aller et al. (1989) provide comprehensive guidance on performing well
decommissioning that can be applied to boreholes. This guidance should be consulted prior
to decommissioning monitoring wells, piezometers, or boreholes. Lamb and Kinney (1989)
also provide information on decommissioning ground-water monitoring wells.
Many states require that specific procedures be followed and certain paperwork be
filed when decommissioning water supply wells. In some states, similar regulations may
apply to the decommissioning of monitoring wells and boreholes. The EPA and other
involved regulatory agencies, as well as experienced geologists, geotechnical engineers, and
drillers, should be consulted prior to decommissioning a well or borehole to ensure that
decommissioning is appropriately performed and to ensure compliance with state law. If a
well to be decommissioned is contaminated, the safe removal and proper disposal of the well
materials should be ensured by the owner/operator. Appropriate measures should be taken to
protect the health and safety of individuals when decommissioning a well or borehole.
November 1992
6-54
-------
CHAPTER SEVEN
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Federal regulations at §§270.14(c)(5), 270.14(c)(6)(iv), and 270.14(c)(7)(vi) require, as
part of the permit application, both a written description of the ground-water monitoring
program proposed to meet the requirements of §264.97 and a description of the proposed
sampling, analysis, and statistical comparison procedures proposed for evaluating ground-
water monitoring data. In addition, §§264.97(d) and 264.97(e) outline minimum procedures
and techniques for ground-water monitoring programs implemented pursuant to 40 CFR Part
264 Subpart F. These regulations require that ground-water monitoring programs include
measurement, sampling, and analytical methods that accurately assess ground-water quality,
and that provide early detection of hazardous constituents released to ground water.
Measurement, sampling, and analytical methods that are part of the ground-water monitoring
program should be documented in the operating record and should include quality assurance
and quality control procedures. These procedures are reviewed and revised by the regulatory
agency, referenced in the permit (pursuant to §264.97), and included in the Quality Assurance
Project Plan (QAPjP), as recommended in Chapter One of SW-846.
All procedures and techniques used for site characterization, ground-water monitoring
well installation and development, sample collection, sample preservation and shipment,
analytical procedures, chain-of-custody control, and implementing other monitoring programs
(e.g., vadose zone monitoring and monitoring of springs in karst terranes) should be specified
in a QAPjP and should conform with Chapter One of SW-846. The owner/operator and field
personnel should follow the QAPjP while performing the site characterization, installing and
developing monitoring wells, and collecting and analyzing ground-water samples. A proposed
schedule, including dates anticipated for project initiation, project milestones, schedule of
monitoring activities, and dates anticipated for completion of project, should be provided in
the QAPjP. A milestone table or a bar chart consisting of project tasks and time lines is
appropriate for inclusion in the QAPjP.
Section 7.1 describes important elements of QAPjPs. Sections 7.2 through 7.9 discuss
each element in greater detail.
7.1 Elements of the Quality Assurance Project Plan
The QAPjP proposed by the owner/operator in the permit application should address
the elements described in Chapter One of SW-846. At a minimum, the QAPjP should
address:
November 1992
7-1
-------
Sampling objectives;
Pre-sampling activities;
Sample collection;
In-situ or field analyses;
Sample preservation and handling;
Chain-of-custody control and records management;
Analytical procedures and quantitation limits for both laboratory and field
methods;
Field and laboratory quality assurance/quality control;
Evaluation of data quality; and
Health and safety.
The QAPjP also should include procedures for conducting the site characterization,
installing and developing ground-water monitoring wells, and implementing other monitoring
programs (e.g., vadose zone monitoring and monitoring of springs in karst terranes).
7.2 Pre-Sampling Activities
The following activities should be performed prior to collecting ground-water samples
for analysis:
Determining sampling frequency;
Measurement of static water level elevation;
Detection and sampling of immiscible layers; and
Well purging.
These activities are discussed in greater detail in the following sections.
November 1992
7-2
-------
7.2.1 Determining Sampling Frequency
The frequency at which ground-water samples will be collected should be described in
the QAPjP. Sampling frequency, in nearly all cases, should be based on the hydrogeology of
the site. There is no maximum sampling frequency set by the Agency. The minimum
frequency for sampling is at least semiannual (§§264.98(d) and 264.99(f)). As stated in
§§264.97(g) and 264.99(f), the Regional Administrator will specify the frequency for
sampling in the permit. Proposed sampling frequencies should be submitted by the owner or
operator as part of the permit application. Furthermore, regulations at §264.97(h) require the
owner/operator to use one of the several specified statistical procedures, or to use an
alternative method that meets specified performance standards. The method chosen should be
approved by the Regional Administrator, and specified in the operating permit. EPA's
guidance document "Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring Data at RCRA
Facilities," Interim Final Guidance (EPA/530-SW-89-026, NTIS PB-89-151-047; USEPA
1989a) suggests a method for choosing a sampling frequency that will reflect site-specific
hydrogeologic conditions. The method uses the Darcy equation to determine the horizontal
component of the average linear velocity of ground water for confined, semiconfined, and
unconfined aquifers. This value is used to determine a sampling frequency that will yield an
independent sample of ground water in diffuse flow regimes.
Recent research performed in the area of ground-water sampling frequency (Barcelona
et al., 1989) indicates that ground-water monitoring data should be carefully collected over
long periods of time (i.e., greater than two years) to determine optimal sampling frequency
and to delineate seasonal trends in ground-water monitoring results. In Barcelona et al.'s
study, ground water was collected biweekly for 18 months and analyzed for 26 water quality
and geochemical constituents. The researchers determined that for the study site, ground-
water sampling performed four to six times per year would result in an estimated information
loss below 20% and would minimize redundancy. The researchers concluded that by using
careful sampling and analytical procedures, sampling and analytical errors could be controlled
to approximately ±20% of the annual mean inorganic chemical constituent concentrations in
ground water.
Alternative methods should be employed to determine a sampling frequency in
hydrogeologic settings where conduit flow predominates and where Darcy's law is invalid
(e.g., karst terrane). Section 4.5.5 discusses how to determine monitoring frequencies in these
environments. More detailed information may be found in Quinlan and Alexander (1987).
In addition to the routine analyses to be performed as specified in the facility's permit,
all land disposal facilities applying for a RCRA operating permit that have contaminated
ground water must identify the concentration of each Appendix IX constituent throughout the
plume or identify the maximum concentrations of each Appendix IX constituent in the plume
(§270.14(c)(4)(ii)). This analysis is conducted for the purpose of characterizing the
chemistry of the background and downgradient ground water.
November 1992
7-3
-------
7.2.2 Measurement of Static Water Level Elevation
The QAPjP should include procedures for measuring the static water level elevation in
each well prior to each sampling event, as required in §264.97(f). The QAPjP also should
include procedures for measuring the depth of each well prior to each sampling event.
Measuring water level elevations on a regular basis is important for determining whether
horizontal and vertical components of the hydraulic gradient have changed since initial site
characterization. A change in ground-water flow direction may necessitate modifying the
design of the ground-water monitoring system.
Water level elevations typically have been measured using a number of devices and
methods, including the following:
Steel tape coated with carpenter's chalk (wetted-tape method);
Float-type devices;
Pressure transducers;
Acoustic well probes;
Electric sensors; and
Air lines.
These devices and methods are described in more detail in Aller et al. (1989), USEPA
(1987a), and Dalton et al. (1991). Dalton et al. (1991) provide the water level measurement
accuracy of each of these devices. The QAPjP should specify the device to be used for water
level measurements, as well as the procedure for measuring water levels.
Regardless of the method or device chosen to measure the water level elevation in a
monitoring well or piezometer, the following criteria should be met when determining water
level elevations:
Prior to measurement, water levels in piezometers and wells should be allowed
to recover for a minimum of 24 hours after well construction, well
development, or well purging. In low yield aquifers, recovery may take longer
than 24 hours. If necessary, several water level measurements should be made
over a period of several days to ensure that recovery has occurred.
Water levels should be measured with a precision of ±0.01 foot. Water levels
should be measured from the surveyed datum on the top of the inner well
November 1992
7-4
-------
casing. In general, the wetted-tape method is the only method for water level
measurement that is consistently accurate to 0.01 foot (Dalton et al., 1991).
Water level measurements from boreholes, piezometers, or monitoring wells
used to define the water table or a single potentiometric surface should be
made within 24 hours. In certain situations, water level measurements should
be made within an even shorter time interval. These situations typically
include:
tidally influenced aquifers;
aquifers affected by river stage, bank storage, impoundments,
and/or unlined ditches;
aquifers stressed by intermittent pumping of production irrigation
or supply wells; and
aquifers being actively recharged because of recent precipitation.
Water level measurement equipment should be constructed of materials that are
chemically inert and not prone to sorption or desorption.
Water level measurement equipment should be decontaminated prior to use at
each well to ensure sample integrity and to prevent cross-contamination of
ground water.
Measuring tapes and marked cables that are used to measure water levels
should be periodically checked for stretch.
Well depth should be measured each time ground water is sampled. Well depth may
be measured using a weighted tape measure or marked cable constructed of materials that are
chemically inert and not prone to sorption or desorption. The weight should be heavy enough
to keep the tape measure straight and blunt enough so that it will not penetrate soft materials
on the bottom of the well. The deeper the well, the heavier the weight has to be to "feel" the
bottom of the well. Standing water level measuring devices are generally not appropriate for
making well depth measurements. Equipment used to measure well depth should be
decontaminated prior to use at each well. The measuring tape or marked cable used to
measure well depth should be periodically checked for stretch.
November 1992
7-5
-------
7.2.3 Detection and Sampling of Immiscible Layers
The QAPjP should include procedures for detecting and measuring the thicknesses of
immiscible contaminants (i.e., LNAPLs and DNAPLs) each time water level is measured, if
immiscible contaminants are known to occur (or are determined to potentially occur after
considering the waste types managed at the facility) in the subsurface at the facility.
LNAPLs, also known as "floaters," are relatively insoluble organic liquids that are less dense
than water and that spread across the water table. DNAPLs, also known as "sinkers," are
relatively insoluble organic liquids that are more dense than water and tend to migrate
vertically downward in aquifers toward underlying confining layers. The detection of
immiscible contaminants requires specialized equipment, and should be performed before a
well is purged for conventional sampling.
The QAPjP should specify the device(s) that will be used to detect LNAPLs and
DNAPLs. The procedures for detecting LNAPLs and DNAPLs should include procedures for
measuring depth to both the non-aqueous phase liquid (NAPL) layer and to the water surface.
When opening wells that may contain LNAPLs or DNAPLs, the air above the well head
should be monitored to determine the potential for fire, explosion, and safety hazards, or
adverse health effects to workers. Air monitoring also serves as a first indication of the
presence of LNAPLs. The presence of LNAPLs precludes the exclusive use of sounders or
manometers to make a determination of static water level. A manometer or acoustical
sounder (for very shallow wells) may provide an accurate reading of the depth to the surface
of the liquid in the well, but neither is capable of differentiating between the water table and
the surface of an immiscible layer. Often an interface gauging probe or a weighted tape
coated with commercially available reactive indicator paste will be suitable for this purpose.
The interface probe serves two related purposes. First, as it is lowered into the well,
the probe registers when it is exposed to an organic liquid and thus identifies the presence of
LNAPLs. Careful recording of the depths of the air/LNAPL and LNAPL/water interfaces
establishes a measurement of the thickness of the LNAPL in the well casing. Secondly, after
passing through the LNAPL layer, the probe indicates the depth to the water level. Interface
probes are available that can be used to measure the thickness of DNAPLs. The Regional
Administrator should be notified when LNAPLs or DNAPLs have been detected in a well.
The QAPjP also should include the procedures that will be used to sample LNAPLs or
DNAPLs. A sample of the LNAPL or DNAPL should be collected prior to well purging.
The Agency understands that bailers typically must be used to collect LNAPLs and DNAPLs
because immiscible phases do not often occur in thicknesses that can be satisfactorily sampled
using recommended submersible pumps. The key to minimizing sample bias is controlled,
slow lowering (and raising) of the bailer within the well.
The approach to sampling LNAPLs depends on the depth to the floating layer surface
and the thickness of the layer. If the thickness of the LNAPL in the well casing is great
November 1992
7-6
-------
enough, a double check valve (point source) bailer or a submersible pump (see Section 7.3)
can be used. If a bailer is used, the bailer should be lowered slowly until contact is made
with the surface of the LNAPL. The bailer should then be lowered to a depth less than the
depth of the LNAPL/water interface, as determined beforehand using the interface probe. A
double-check valve bailer also may be used to sample a DNAPL. A submersible pump also
may be used to sample a DNAPL if the DNAPL layer is of sufficient thickness.
When the thickness of the LNAPL layer in the well casing is too small to be sampled
with a double check valve bailer or pump, the bailer should be modified to allow filling only
from the top. If a top-filling bailer is not available, sampling personnel can disassemble the
bottom check valve of a bailer and insert a piece of fluorocarbon resin sheet between the ball
and ball seat. This will seal off the bottom valve. The ball from the top check valve should
be removed to allow the sample to enter from the top. The buoyancy that occurs when the
bailer is lowered into the LNAPL can be overcome either by using a stainless steel bailer or
by securing a length of 1-inch stainless steel pipe (Type 304, Type 316) below the bailer.
The bailer should be lowered carefully into the well, measuring the depth to the surface of the
LNAPL layer, until the top of the bailer is level with the top of the LNAPL layer. The bailer
should be lowered an additional one-half thickness of the LNAPL layer and the sample
should then be collected. This technique is the most effective method of sample collection if
the LNAPL is only a few inches thick.
When the LNAPL layer in the well casing is less than approximately 2 inches thick,
an alternative method is necessary. In this situation, a sample should be collected from the
top of the water column using a bailer. The two-phase water/LNAPL sample should be
appropriately containerized and submitted for laboratory analysis. The laboratory should be
instructed to analyze the non-aqueous phase of the two-phase sample.
7.2.4 Well Purging
Because the water standing in a well prior to sampling may not represent in-situ
ground-water quality, stagnant water should be purged from the well and filter pack prior to
sampling. The QAPjP should include detailed, step-by-step procedures for purging wells,
including the parameters that will be monitored during purging and the equipment that will be
used for well purging.
The purging procedure should ensure that samples collected from the well are
representative of the ground water to be monitored. Over the years, investigator opinions
have varied widely regarding the most appropriate procedure for purging wells. Many
investigators believe that a specified number of well volumes should be purged from a well,
some investigators believe that purging procedures should be based on hydraulic performance
of the well, others believe that wells should be purged until certain geochemical parameters
have stabilized, and yet others believe that wells should not be purged at all. The Agency's
guidance regarding well purging is based on information based on research and studies
November 1992
7-7
-------
described in Puls and Powell (1992), Puls and Barcelona (1989a), Puls et al. (1991),
Barcelona, et al. (1990), Kearl et al. (1992), Puls et al. (1990), Puls and Barcelona (1989b),
Barcelona et al. (1985b), Robin and Gillham (1987), Barcelona (1985b), Keeley and Boateng
(1987), Puls and Eychaner (1990), and USEPA (1991).
Purging should be accomplished by removing ground water from the well at low flow
rates using a pump. The use of bailers to purge monitoring wells generally should be
avoided. Research has shown that the "plunger" effect created by continually raising and
lowering the bailer into the well can result in continual development or overdevelopment of
the well. Moreover, the velocities at which ground water enters a bailer can actually
correspond to unacceptably high purging rates (Puls and Powell, 1992; Barcelona et al.,
1990).
The rate at which ground water is removed from the well during purging ideally
should be less than approximately 0.2 to 0.3 L/min (Puls and Powell, 1992; Puls et al., 1991;
Puls and Barcelona, 1989a; Barcelona, et al., 1990). Wells should be purged at rates below
those used to develop the well to prevent further development of the well, to prevent damage
to the well, and to avoid disturbing accumulated corrosion or reaction products in the well
(Kearl et al., 1992; Puls et al., 1990; Puls and Barcelona, 1989a; Puls and Barcelona, 1989b;
Barcelona, 1985b). Wells also should be purged at or below their recovery rate so that
migration of water in the formation above the well screen does not occur. A low purge rate
also will reduce the possibility of stripping VOCs from the water, and will reduce the
likelihood of mobilizing colloids in the subsurface that are immobile under natural flow
conditions. The owner/operator should ensure that purging does not cause formation water to
cascade down the sides of the well screen. At no time should a well be purged to dryness if
recharge causes the formation water to cascade down the sides of the screen, as this will
cause an accelerated loss of volatiles. This problem should be anticipated; water should be
purged from the well at a rate that does not cause recharge water to be excessively agitated.
Laboratory experiments have shown that unless cascading is prevented, up to 70 percent of
the volatiles present could be lost before sampling.
To eliminate the need to dispose of large volumes of purge water, and to reduce the
amount of time required for purging, wells may be purged with the pump intake just above or
just within the screened interval. This procedure eliminates the need to purge the column of
stagnant water located above the well screen (Barcelona et al., 1985b; Robin and Gillham,
1987; Barcelona, 1985b; Kearl et al., 1992). Purging the well at the top of the well screen
should ensure that fresh water from the aquifer moves through the well screen and upward
within the screened interval. Pumping rates below the recharge capability of the aquifer must
be maintained if purging is performed with the pump placed at the top of the well screen,
below the stagnant water column above the top of the well screen (Kearl et al., 1992). The
Agency suggests that a packer be placed above the screened interval to ensure that "stagnant"
casing water is not drawn into the pump. The packer should be kept inflated in the well until
after ground-water samples are collected.
November 1992
7-8
-------
In certain situations, purging must be performed with the pump placed at, or
immediately below, the air/water interface. If a bailer must be used to sample the well, the
well should be purged by placing the pump intake immediately below the air/water interface.
This will ensure that all of the water in the casing and filter pack is purged, and it will
minimize the possibility of mixing and/or sampling stagnant water when the bailer is lowered
down into the well and subsequently retrieved (Keeley and Boateng, 1987). Similarly,
purging should be performed at the air/water interface if sampling is not performed
immediately after the well is purged without removing the pump. Pumping at the air/water
interface will prevent the mixing of stagnant and fresh water when the pump used to purge
the well is removed and then lowered back down into the well for the purpose of sampling.
In cases where an LNAPL has been detected in the monitoring well, a stilling tube
should be inserted into the well prior to well purging. The stilling tube should be composed
of a material that meets the performance guidelines outlined in Section 7.3 for sampling
devices. The stilling tube should be inserted into the well to a depth that allows ground water
from the screened interval to be purged and sampled, but that is below the upper portion of
the screened interval where the LNAPL is entering the well screen. The goal is to sample the
aqueous phase (ground water) while preventing the LNAPL from entering the sampling
device. To achieve this goal, the stilling tube must be inserted into the well in a manner that
prevents the LNAPL from entering the stilling tube. One method of doing this is to cover the
end of the stilling tube with a membrane or material that will be ruptured by the weight of
the pump. Some investigators place a piece of aluminum foil over the end of the stilling
tube. The stilling tube is lowered slowly into the well to the appropriate depth and then
attached firmly to the top of the well casing. When the pump is inserted, the weight of the
pump breaks the foil covering the end of the tube, and the well can be purged and sampled
from below the LNAPL layer. The membrane or material that is used to cover the end of the
stilling tube must be fastened firmly so that it remains attached to the stilling tube when
ruptured. Moreover, the membrane or material must retain its integrity after it is ruptured.
Pieces of the membrane or material must not fall off of the stilling tube into the well.
Although aluminum foil is mentioned in this discussion as an example of a material that can
be used to cover the end of the tube, a more chemically inert material may be required, based
on the site-specific situation. Stilling tubes should be decontaminated prior to each use
according to the procedures outlined for sampling equipment in Section 7.3.
For most wells, the Agency recommends that purging continue until measurements of
turbidity, redox potential, and dissolved oxygen in in-line or downhole analyses of ground
water have stabilized within approximately 10% over at least two measurements — for
example, over two successive measurements made three minutes apart (Puls and Powell,
1992; Puls and Eychaner, 1990; Puls et al., 1990; Puls and Barcelona, 1989a; Puls and
Barcelona, 1989b; USEPA, 1991; Barcelona et al., 1988b). If a well is purged to dryness or
is purged such that full recovery exceeds two hours, the well should be sampled as soon as a
sufficient volume of ground water has entered the well to enable the collection of the
necessary ground-water samples.
November 1992
7-9
-------
All purging equipment that has been or will be in contact with ground water should be
decontaminated prior to use. Decontamination procedures outlined in Section 7.3.4 are
generally adequate. If the purged water or the decontamination water is contaminated (e.g.,
based on analytical results), the water should be stored in appropriate containers until
analytical results are available, at which time proper arrangements for disposal or treatment
should be made (i.e., contaminated purge water may be a hazardous waste).
7.3 Ground-Water Sampling Equipment Selection and Use
There are three broad categories of ground water sampling devices: 1) grab samplers,
2) positive displacement (submersible) pumps, and 3) suction lift pumps (Pohlmann and Hess,
1988; Herzog et al., 1991). Gas contact pumps also are available but are not recommended
for ground-water purging or sampling applications (Pohlmann and Hess, 1988). Table 12 is a
useful guide for selecting devices for sampling. The Agency prefers that all sampling
equipment be dedicated to a particular well. To encourage innovation, the Agency may allow
the use of other devices that are not specifically mentioned above if the owner/operator
demonstrates to the Agency's satisfaction (or to the authorized state's satisfaction) that the
device will yield representative ground-water samples.
The following recommendations apply to the selection of sampling equipment:
Sampling equipment should be chosen based on the analytes of interest and the
characteristics and depth of the saturated zone from which the sample is
withdrawn. For example, the choice of sampling equipment should reflect
consideration of the potential for LNAPLs and DNAPLs (Section 7.2.3).
Sampling equipment should be constructed of inert material. Sample collection
equipment should not alter analyte concentrations, cause loss of analytes via
sorption, or cause gain of analytes via desorption, degradation, or corrosion.
Sampling equipment should be designed such that Viton®, Tygon®, silicone, or
neoprene components do not come into contact with the ground-water sample.
These materials have been demonstrated to cause sorptive losses of
contaminants (Barcelona et al., 1983; Barcelona et al., 1985b; Barcelona et al.,
1988b; Barcelona et al., 1990). Barcelona (1988b) suggests that sorption of
volatile organic compounds on silicone, polyethylene, and PVC tubing may
result in gross errors when determining concentrations of trace organics in
ground-water samples. Barcelona (1985b) discourages the use of PVC
sampling equipment when sampling for organic contaminants.
Sampling equipment should cause minimal sample agitation and should be
selected to reduce/eliminate sample contact with the atmosphere during sample
transfer. Sampling equipment should not allow volatilization or aeration of
samples to the extent that analyte concentrations are altered.
November 1992
7-10
-------
X
DC
UJ
O
UJ
o
o
z
a.
rx
UJ
Q
O
rx
o
Q
UJ
N
_l
DC
UJ
GROUND-WATER PARAMETERS
BIOLOG-
ICAL
RADIO-
ACTIVE
ORGANIC
INORGANIC
§ro
- 3
IS
0.0
01 *
W 03 jS
<5f ^
E
^
S.
1
8
=
s
5
, £
If
0) (0
§ i
5ra
fl
II
ziZ
§J2
.1
i- e
o w
i§
1
i
u
UJ
flsl
cSS^I
E oj
111
c > oj
^ b
CD
lil-
o 1 E f
feia«
<
s
1
•
D
D
D
a
a
a
a
variable
c
«
I
§
s
£
I
•
D
•
•
a
a
•
variable
c
s
*±
§
Point-Source
Ballet
•
D
a
a
•
CM
O
_c
S
1
o
c
§,«
-E
wS
avas
a
•
•
•
•
0-0.5 gpm
c
CO
*f
§
CM
Gear-drive
•
•
•
•
•
1
CT
CM
6
c
S
*:
o
§
Bladder
pump
D
•
•
•
•
a
O>
CJ
6
c
C\J
tr
o
(O
I
D
D
D
D
D
a
0-0.5 gpm
c
y
c
o
s
Piston pump
(gas-drive)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
«
3
CM
Peristaltic
1
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
variable
c
variable
S
S
o
D
D
•
a
a
a
•
a
•
a
•
a
a
•
a.
O)
fl||*
E-^ -1 "5
•E S -5
151IIB
I
11
^ D
O ^
3 in
in ca
TABLE 12
November 1992
7-11
-------
The following sections briefly discuss the various types of sampling mechanisms, and
their relative advantages and disadvantages. More detailed discussions of the various types of
sampling devices are provided in Nielsen and Yeates (1985), Pohlmann and Hess (1988),
USEPA (1991a), and USEPA (1991b). Because new sampling devices will become available
on a periodic basis, the Agency recommends that the manufacturer's performance testing data
and results be reviewed before selecting a ground-water sampling device. It is expected that
through design improvements, general operating ranges also will improve; therefore, some of
the information contained in the following discussions may become outdated.
7.3.1 Grab Samplers
There are two types of grab samplers available: bailers and syringe devices. The
following sections provide a general description of these devices.
7.3.1.1 Double and Single Check Valve Bailers
Bailers are among the simplest of ground-water sampling devices. A bailer is a rigid
tube that fills with water when lowered into the well; when raised back out of the well, it is
sealed on one or both ends, typically by a ball and seat mechanism. Bailers that seal only at
the bottom are called single check valve bailers, bailers that seal at both ends are called
double check valve bailers or point-source bailers. The ground-water sample is transferred
into sample containers from the bailer. Bailers are relatively inexpensive to purchase or
fabricate, easy to clean, portable, simple to operate, and require no external power source
(USEPA, 1983).
Disadvantages of bailers are that their use can be time consuming and labor intensive
and that the transfer of water to a sample container may significantly alter the chemistry of
ground-water samples due to degassing, volatilization, or aeration (oxidation). Recent
research focusing on the comparison of different types of ground-water sampling equipment
demonstrates that significant loss of volatile organic compounds may occur when bailers are
used to sample ground water (Pearsall and Eckhardt, 1987; Yeskis et al., 1988; Tai et al.,
1991; Pohlmann et al., undated). Researchers also believe that the action of lowering and
raising the bailer in the well may mobilize naturally immobile particulates, and that the
velocity of ground-water entrance into the device may actually approach that of high-rate
pumping methods (Puls and Powell, 1992; Barcelona et al., 1990; Puls and Barcelona, 1989a;
Puls and Barcelona 1989b).
Studies have suggested that considerable imprecision is introduced into samples
collected with bailers, possibly as a result of differences in operator technique (USEPA,
1991a; Tai et al., 1991; Pohlmann et al., undated). In addition, it is difficult to determine the
exact location in the water column from which a bailed sample has been collected; inadequate
sealing of the check valves often increases this imprecision (USEPA, 199la). In a study
comparing concentrations of volatile organic compounds detected using various sampling
November 1992
7-12
-------
devices, Imbrigiotta et al. (1988) noted that the data for the samples collected with the bailers
exhibited the lowest precision of the seven sampling devices investigated.
When sampling NAPLs, bailers should never be dropped into a well and should be
removed from the well in a manner that causes as little agitation of the sample as possible.
For example, the bailer should not be removed in a jerky fashion or be allowed to continually
bang against the well casing as it is raised. When transferring the sample from a bailer to a
container, it is preferable to use a bottom emptying device with a valve that allows the
LNAPL or DNAPL to slowly drain from the bailer. Bailers should not be used if the well
has not been purged by drawing water from the air/water interface because as the bailer is
raised through the water column, the bailer may sample stagnant water located above the
screened interval. When using bailers to collect LNAPL or DNAPL samples for inorganic
analyses, the Agency recommends that the bailer be composed of fluorocarbon resin. Bailers
used to collect LNAPL or DNAPL samples for organic analyses should be constructed of
stainless steel. The cable used to raise and lower the bailer should be composed of an inert
material (e.g., stainless steel) or coated with an inert material (e.g., PTFE).
7.3.1.2 Syringe Bailer
A syringe bailer is distinguished from other bailers by the means of water entry
(Morrison, 1984). The syringe is lowered into a well and water is drawn into the chamber by
activating a plunger via suction. To recover the sample, the syringe is withdrawn and the
sample is transferred into a collection bottle or injected directly into an appropriate instrument
for water quality analysis. The syringe bailer is often used as both a sampler and a sample
container. The small syringe size is a limitation when large sample volumes are required.
Moreover, researchers believe that in waters with high concentrations of suspended solids,
syringe bailers may leak around the plunger. Imbrigiotta et al. (1988) concluded that for
sampling volatile organic compounds, syringe samplers (bailers) were inferior in comparison
to other sampling devices. Imbrigiotta et al. attributed the poor performance of the syringe
sampler to exposure of the sample to widely fluctuating pressures during the sampling process
caused by leakage of the seal between the piston and the syringe barrel.
7.3.2 Pumps
Pump mechanisms historically used for ground-water sampling include bladder pumps,
helical rotor electric submersible pumps, gas-drive piston pumps, gear drive electric
submersible pumps, centrifugal pumps, peristaltic pumps, gas-lift pumps, and gas-drive
pumps. The following sections describe each of these types of pumps and their applications
and limitations with regard to collecting ground-water samples.
November 1992
7-13
-------
7.3.2.1 Bladder Pumps
Bladder pumps (also referred to as gas squeeze pumps) are submersible mechanisms
consisting of a flexible membrane (bladder) enclosed in a rigid (usually stainless steel)
housing. The internal bladder can be compressed and expanded under the influence of gas
(air or nitrogen). A strainer or screen attaches below the bladder to filter any material that
could clog check valves located above and below the bladder. Water enters the bladder
through the lower check valve; compressed gas is injected into the cavity between the housing
and bladder. The sample is transported through the upper check valve and into the discharge
line through compression of the bladder. The upper check valve prevents water from
reentering the bladder. The process is repeated to cycle the water to the surface. Bladder
volumes (e.g., volume per cycle) and sampler geometry can be modified to increase the
sampling abilities of the pump. Automated control systems are available to control gas flow
rates and pressurization cycles.
Bladder pumps prevent contact between the gas and water sample and can be
fabricated entirely of fluorocarbon resin and stainless steel. Pohlmann and Hess (1988)
determined that bladder pumps can be suitable for collecting ground-water samples for almost
any given organic or inorganic constituent. Disadvantages of bladder pumps include the large
gas volumes required (especially at depth), and potential bladder rupture. Bladder pumps are
generally recognized as the best overall sampling device for both inorganic and organic
constituents (Barcelona et al., 1985b; Barcelona, 1988b; USEPA 1991a).
7.3.2.2 Helical Rotor Electric Submersible Pumps
The helical rotor electric pump is a submersible pump consisting of a sealed electric
motor that powers a helical rotor. The ground-water sample is forced up a discharge line by
an electrically driven rotor-stator assembly by centrifugal action. Pumping rates vary
depending upon the depth of the pump. Considerable sample agitation of water in the well
may result from operating the pump at high rates, and this may cause alteration of the sample
chemistry. In addition, high pumping rates can introduce sediments from the formation into
the well that are immobile under ambient ground-water flow conditions, resulting in the
collection of unrepresentative samples (Nielsen and Yeates, 1985). Tai et al. (1991) and
Yeskis et al. (1988) indicate that helical rotor submersible pumps perform similarly to bladder
pumps when collecting samples for volatile organics analysis.
7.3.2.3 Gas-Drive Piston Pumps
A piston pump uses compressed air to force a piston to raise a sample to the surface.
A typical design consists of a stainless steel chamber between two pistons. The alternating
chamber pressurization activates the piston, which allows water entry during the suction
stroke of the piston, and forces the sample to the surface during the pressure stroke. The
pump is connected to a tubing bundle which contains three tubes, an electric cord, and a
November 1992
7-14
-------
stainless steel cable. The tubes convey the gases to and from the pump; the electric cable
powers the water level indicator, and a steel cable supports the downhole assembly. Flow
rate can be controlled by adjusting the driving pressure to the pump. The piston pump
provides continuous sample withdrawal at depths that are greater than most other devices.
The pump can be constructed of materials that minimize the possibility of chemical alteration
of the sample.
The bulk of associated equipment may reduce the portability of the pump. The
valving mechanism may cause a series of pressure drops in the sample that could cause
sample degassing and pH changes. The tubing bundles may be difficult to decontaminate
between wells. The pump intake should be filtered so that particulate matter does not damage
the pump's valving. A study by Yeskis et al. (1988) indicates that gas-drive piston pumps
perform similarly to bladder pumps when collecting samples for volatile organics analysis.
7.3.2.4 Gear-Drive Electric Submersible Pumps
Gear-drive submersible pumps are designed to be portable and easily serviceable in the
field. A gear-drive pump operates using a small high-efficiency electric motor that is located
within the pump housing. The electric motor rotates a set of PTFE gears from an intake
screen at the top of the pump. The water is drawn through the gears and driven to a
discharge line that transports the water to the surface. The pumps have self-contained power
sources, however, external sources may be used. Flow rates cannot be controlled on
conventional gear-drive submersible pumps. Wells that have high levels of suspended solids
may cause the gears to require frequent replacement.
7.3.2.5 Centrifugal Pumps
Centrifugal (also called impeller) pumps transport fluid by accelerating it radially
outward. Specifically, a motor shaft rotates an impeller that is contained within a casing.
Water that is directed into the center of the rotating impeller is picked up by the impeller
vanes, accelerated by the rotation of the impeller, and discharged by centrifugal force into the
casing. A collection chamber within the casing converts much of the kinetic energy into head
or pressure. Certain submersible centrifugal pumps are constructed for ground-water
monitoring purposes. These pumps are fabricated of stainless steel and PTFE, and can be
adjusted to achieve flow rates as low as 0.1 L/min. Studies conducted by Gass et al. (1991)
concluded that low flow-rate submersible centrifugal pumps can deliver "representative"
ground-water samples. A study conducted by Paul and Puls (1992) comparing a low flow-
rate submersible centrifugal pump, a bladder pump, and a peristaltic pump concluded that the
low flow-rate submersible centrifugal pump produced the least negative impacts when trying
to obtain representative and reproducible ground-water samples at the particular site and wells
investigated. Research performed by Yeskis et al. (1988) indicates that submersible impeller
pumps perform similarly to bladder pumps when collecting samples for volatile organics
analysis.
November 1992
7-15
-------
7.3.2.6 Peristaltic Pumps
A peristaltic pump (also called rotary peristaltic) is a low-volume pump that operates
by suction lift. Plastic tubing is inserted around the pump rotor. Rotating rollers compress
the tubing as the rollers revolve around the rotor, forcing fluid movement ahead and inducing
suction behind each roller. As the rotor revolves, water is drawn into a sampling tube that
has been inserted into the well, and discharged into the sample container. Peristaltic pumps
often require the use of flexible silicone tubing, which is unsuitable for ground-water
sampling purposes. The withdrawal rate of peristaltic pumps can be carefully regulated by
adjusting the rotor head revolution. The use of a peristaltic pump is limited by the depth of
sampling; the depth of sample collection is limited to situations where the potentiometric level
is less than 25 feet below land surface (Herzog et al., 1991).
The Agency does not recommend the use of peristaltic pumps to sample ground water,
particularly for volatile organic analytes. The method can cause sample mixing and oxidation
resulting in degassing and loss of volatiles. Although Tai et al. (1991) indicated that
peristaltic pumps may provide adequate recovery of volatile organic compounds, Imbrigiotta
et al. (1988) concluded that for sampling volatile organic compounds, peristaltic pumps were
inferior in comparison to other sampling devices. Imbrigiotta et al. attributed the poor
performance of the peristaltic pump to degassing of volatile contaminants into the vacuum
created by the pump. Puls and Barcelona (1989a) and Puls and Barcelona (1989b) indicated
that vacuum pumps such as peristaltic pumps may significantly alter ground-water chemistry
leading to colloid formation in the monitoring well.
7.3.2.7 Gas-Lift Pumps
An air- or gas-lift pump allows collection of ground-water samples by bubbling air or
gas at depth in the well. Sample transport occurs primarily as a result of the reduced specific
gravity of the water being lifted to the surface. Water is forced up a discharge pipe, which
may be the outer casing or a smaller diameter pipe inserted into the well. The considerable
pressures required for deep sampling can result in significant redox and pH changes. Gas-lift
pumps should not be used for any purpose in ground-water investigations.
7.3.2.8 Gas-Drive Pumps
Gas drive (gas displacement) pumps are distinguished from gas-lift pumps by their
method of sample transport. Gas-drive pumps force a column of water under linear flow
conditions to the surface without extensive mixing of the pressurized gas and water. A
vacuum also can be used to assist the gas. The disadvantages of a gas drive pump are that
the drive gas comes into contact with the water and therefore, can be a source of
contamination; also, the pump can be difficult to clean. Gas-drive pumps are not
recommended for sampling monitoring wells.
November 1992
7-16
-------
7.3.3 Packer Assemblages
A packer assembly provides a means by which to isolate and sample a discrete
interval in the subsurface. Hydraulic- or pneumatic-activated packers are wedged against the
casing wall or screen allowing sample collection from an isolated portion of the well. The
packers deflate for vertical movement within the well and inflate when the desired depth is
attained. Packers are usually constructed from some type of rubber or rubber compound and
can be used with submersible, gas-lift, and suction pumps.
If pumps are operated at a low rate, a packer assembly allows sampling of low-
yielding wells, and wells that would otherwise produce turbid samples. A number of different
samplers can be placed within the packers depending upon the analytical specifications for
sample testing. One disadvantage is that vertical movement of water outside the well is
possible with packer assemblages, depending upon the pumping rate and formation properties.
Another possible disadvantage is that the packer material may be chemically reactive, causing
gain or loss of organic contaminants through sorption or desorption.
7.3.4 Decontaminating Sampling Equipment
When dedicated equipment is not used for sampling (or well purging) or when
dedicated equipment is stored outside of the well, the owner/operator's QAPjP should include
procedures for disassembly and cleaning of equipment before each use at each well.
The recommended cleaning procedure for sampling equipment used when organic
constituents are of interest is as follows (Barcelona et al., 1990; Keeley and Boateng, 1987;
USEPA, 1986a):
1. Wash the equipment with a nonphosphate detergent.
2. Rinse the equipment with tap water.
3. Rinse the equipment with pesticide-grade hexane or methanol (methyl alcohol).
4. Rinse the equipment with reagent grade acetone.
5. Rinse the equipment with organic-free reagent water.
If acetone, hexane, or methanol are analytes of interest, a different solvent (which is not a
target analyte) should be chosen (e.g., isopropanol).
The recommended cleaning procedure for sampling equipment used when inorganic
constituents are of interest is as follows (Barcelona et al., 1990; Keeley and Boateng, 1987;
USEPA, 1986a):
November 1992
7-17
-------
1. Wash the equipment with a nonphosphate detergent.
2. Rinse the equipment with tap water.
3. Rinse the equipment with dilute (0.1N) hydrochloric or nitric acid.
4. Rinse the equipment with reagent water.
Dilute hydrochloric acid is preferred over nitric acid when cleaning stainless steel because
nitric acid may oxidize the steel.
In all cases, waste decontamination fluids should be containerized until the
investigators determine (e.g., through analytical testing) whether the fluids should be treated
or disposed of as hazardous waste.
All equipment should be allowed to dry thoroughly in a dust-free environment. If the
equipment is not to be used again immediately, it should be packaged and properly stored to
protect it from dust and dirt. Equipment may be wrapped in aluminum foil (shiny side on the
outside) and placed in a plastic bag. A label should be affixed to the outside wrapping
summarizing the decontamination procedure and stating the date of decontamination.
Decontaminated sampling equipment should not be placed on the ground or on other
contaminated surfaces prior to insertion in the well.
7.3.5 Collecting Ground-Water Samples
Monitoring well sampling should always progress from the well that is expected to be
least contaminated to the well that is expected to be most contaminated, to minimize the
potential for cross-contamination of samples that may result from inadequate decontamination
of sampling equipment. Samples should be collected and containerized according to the
volatility of the target analytes. The preferred collection order for some of the more
common ground-water analytes is as follows (Barcelona et al., 1985b):
1. Volatile organics (VOAs or VOCs) and total organic halogens (TOX);
2. Dissolved gases and total organic carbon (TOC);
3. Semivolatile organics (SMVs or SVOCs);
4. Metals and cyanide;
5. Major water quality cations and anions;
6. Radionuclides.
November 1992
7-18
-------
The following recommendations apply to the use and operation of ground-water
sampling equipment:
Check valves should be designed and inspected to ensure that fouling problems
do not reduce delivery capabilities or result in aeration of samples.
Sampling equipment should never be dropped into the well, as this will cause
degassing of the water upon impact.
Contents of the sampling device should be transferred to sample containers in a
controlled manner that will minimize sample agitation and aeration.
Decontaminated sampling equipment should not be allowed to come into
contact with the ground or other contaminated surfaces prior to insertion into
the well.
Ground-water samples should be collected as soon as possible after the well is
purged. Water that has remained in the well casing for more than about 2
hours has had the opportunity to exchange gases with the atmosphere and to
interact with the well casing material (USEPA, 1991b).
The rate at which a well is sampled should not exceed the rate at which the
well was purged. Ideally, the rate of sample collection should be
approximately the same as the actual ground-water flow rate. Because this is
typically not possible, low sampling rates, approximately 0.1 L/min, are
suggested. Low sampling rates will help to ensure that particulates, immobile
in the subsurface under ambient conditions, are not entrained in the sample and
that volatile compounds are not stripped from the sample (Puls and Barcelona,
1989b; Barcelona, et al., 1990; Puls et al., 1991; Kearl et al., 1992; USEPA,
1991b). Pumps should be operated at rates less than 0.1 L/min when collecting
samples for volatile organics analysis.
Pump lines should be cleared at a rate of 0.1 L/min or less before collecting
samples for volatiles analysis so that the samples collected will not be from the
period of time when the pump was operating more rapidly.
Pumps should be operated in a continuous, non-pulsating manner so that they
do not produce samples that are aerated in the return tube or upon discharge.
When sampling wells that contain LNAPLs, a stilling tube should be inserted
in the well as described in Section 7.2.4. Ground-water samples should be
collected from the screened interval of the well below the base of the tube.
November 1992
7-19
-------
Ground-water samples collected for analysis for organic constituents or
parameters should not be filtered in the field.
Currently, some hydrogeologists filter ground-water samples in the field using a 0.45
micron filter prior to chemical analysis of certain constituents. The Agency generally does
not recommend that ground-water samples that will be used to determine if there is
statistically significant evidence of ground-water contamination be filtered in the field.
Nevertheless, the Agency understands that there may be circumstances where filtering ground-
water samples is appropriate. For example, some wells may produce highly turbid ground
water even though the wells have been appropriately installed and have been sampled using
procedures intended to minimize sample turbidity. The Agency believes that in these
circumstances filtering the ground-water samples in the field prior to their analysis for metals
may be appropriate if filtering can be performed while still fulfilling the data quality
objectives (DQOs) for the ground-water monitoring program.
There are several reasons why the Agency generally does not recommend filtering
ground-water samples in the field prior to analysis for metals. One of the primary reasons is
that data generated from filtered samples provide information on only the dissolved
constituents that are present, because suspended materials are removed by the filtration
process. As discussed in greater detail below, current research in ground-water sampling
protocol indicates that hazardous constituents are mobile in the subsurface in both the aqueous
(dissolved) phase and the solid phase. The research of Puls and Powell (1992), Puls and
Barcelona (1989a), Puls and Barcelona (1989b), Penrose et al. (1990), and West (1990) are
the primary sources of the discussion of field filtration that follows.
During ground-water sampling, every attempt should be made to minimize changes in
the chemistry of the sample so that data representative of hazardous constituents that may be
migrating to ground water can be collected. A sample that is exposed to the atmosphere as a
result of field filtering is very likely to undergo chemical reactions (e.g., volatilization,
precipitation, chemical flocculation) that alter constituent concentrations. These reactions can
change the concentrations of organic compounds and metals if they are present in the sample.
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), for example, are likely to partition to the atmosphere,
thereby resulting in ground-water monitoring data that are not representative of constituent
concentrations. Further, precipitated and emulsion trapped constituents migrating from the
waste management unit to ground water are lost through field filtering, because they are
unable to pass through a standard 0.45 micron field filter.
Field filtration of ground-water samples that will be used for metals analysis may not
provide accurate information concerning the mobility of metal contaminants. Field filtration
of ground-water samples may be especially problematic in fractured or karst terranes.
Facilitated transport phenomena are more likely to occur in these types of aquifer systems that
are characterized by conduit flow, because colloidal particles can move easily through the
larger channels formed by fractures or by the dissolution of carbonates. Some metals may
November 1992
7-20
-------
move through fractured, karstic, and porous media not only as dissolved species, but also as
precipitated phases, and/or polymeric species; some metals may be adsorbed to, or
encapsulated in, organic or inorganic particles (e.g., colloid-size particles) that are likely to be
removed by filtration. In addition, field filtration may expose a sample to the atmosphere,
introducing oxygen into the sample that can oxidize dissolved ferrous iron to form a ferric
hydroxide precipitate (Fe(OH)3). The ferric hydroxide precipitate may enmesh other metals in
the sample, removing them from solution. The precipitate and the entrapped constituents
would be removed by field filtration. This phenomenon (which may be common because of
the ubiquity of dissolved iron in ground water and iron colloidal particles, such as goethite, in
the subsurface), also could result in an inaccurate measurement of metals concentrations in
ground water at the facility. The Agency's position to prohibit field filtration of ground-water
samples is even more crucial in fractured or karst terranes. Colloidal transport phenomena
are more likely to occur in aquifer systems characterized by conduit flow, because colloidal
particles can move easily through the larger channels formed by fractures and the dissolution
of carbonates.
Several recent studies demonstrate that metals can migrate in ground water with
colloidal particles (via a phenomenon known as facilitated transport), and that those colloids
will not pass through a standard 0.45 micron field filter. Studies of the behavior of several
persistent chlorinated organic compounds such as DDT, PCBs, and dioxin, also have
demonstrated that the solubility of those substances is greatly increased by the presence of
surfactants. Surfactants form a microemulsion in water, trapping the organic compounds while
allowing them to stay dissolved in water and to continue moving throughout an aquifer.
These emulsion-trapped organic compounds have similar contaminant fate and transport
characteristics to that of metals bound up in colloids. Field filtering ground-water samples for
organic compounds or metals analyses would remove these constituents and therefore lead to
inaccurate measurements of their concentration in ground water.
The Agency is aware that many hydrogeologic field crews have routinely field filtered
ground-water samples in an effort to decrease the sample turbidity. Some of this removed
fraction may represent hazardous constituents that are mobile in ground water under natural
conditions, and some of this fraction may represent immobile constituents. In many cases,
however, proper well development and maintenance procedures (e.g., development of the well
after installation to remove fine-grained materials, and periodic re-development of wells to
counter the effects of siltation) are sufficient to reduce sample turbidity. In addition, the
selection of an appropriate filter pack material (both composition and grain size) and screen
slot size are important components of monitoring well design that can reduce sample
turbidity. Further, lower well purging rates and sampling rates (e.g., less than 1.0
liter/minute) will minimize the amount of material flowing into the well without removing the
fraction of the sample that may contain potential hazardous constituents that are mobile in the
subsurface under natural conditions. Common sampling techniques often involve the use of
bailers that do not allow low flow rate sampling.
November 1992
7-21
-------
The Agency recognizes that there are certain circumstances where it is necessary to
filter or centrifuge a sample under controlled laboratory conditions prior to analysis to prevent
instrument damage. Sample filtration in the laboratory is permissible if insoluble materials
(e.g., silicates) remain after acid digestion of the sample, which could damage laboratory
equipment. If this step is necessary, the filter and the filtering apparatus should be thoroughly
cleaned and pre-rinsed with dilute nitric acid. Laboratory personnel should refer to Chapter
Three of the EPA publication "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste" (SW-846) for
information concerning these procedures.
The Agency also realizes that data generated from unfiltered samples may result in
higher concentrations of metals detected in ground-water samples at some facilities. Because
background samples also will be unfiltered, however, false indications of contamination
should be minimized. In all cases, owners and operators should ensure that all samples used
in a statistical test are collected using the same procedures.
Ground-water sampling that is conducted to perform ion balance calculations or to
classify ground water according to the amount of dissolved ions is not addressed in this
Chapter, because these analyses are not part of the Subpart F requirements. Scientific studies
that are performed to estimate aqueous concentrations of dissolved geochemical parameters
have different data objectives than Subpart F ground-water monitoring, and commonly utilize
other techniques and procedures to achieve the desired research goals.
7.4 In-Situ or Field Analyses
Physically or chemically unstable analytes should be measured in the field, rather than
in the laboratory. Examples of unstable parameters include pH, redox potential, dissolved
oxygen, and temperature. Although the specific conductance (i.e., electrical conductance) of a
sample should be relatively stable, the Agency recommends that this analyte also be measured
in the field. The Agency suggests that dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and specific conductance
be determined in the field as soon as practicable after the well has been purged. Most
conductivity instruments require temperature compensation; therefore, the temperature of the
samples should be measured at the time conductivity is determined unless the monitoring
equipment automatically makes this compensation.
Three methods are generally employed for measuring unstable parameters. The two
preferred methods are to use either an in-line flow cell or specially designed analytical
equipment that has probes that may be lowered down into the well. These methods provide
results that typically are more precise than those obtained using the third method, collecting
discrete samples and analyzing them at land surface. Specifically, the third method involves
collecting a sample in a clean bottle or beaker in the same manner that a sample for
laboratory analysis would be collected, and then analyzing the sample using a field test kit or
meter at land surface. If down-hole probes (e.g., pH electrode, thermistor) are used to
measure unstable parameters, the probes should be decontaminated in a manner that prevents
November 1992
7-22
-------
the probe(s) from contaminating the water in the well. In no case should field analyses be
performed directly on samples that will be submitted for laboratory analysis.
The QAPjP to be included in the permit application should list the specific parameters
that will be measured in the field. The QAPjP should specify the types of instruments (e.g.,
in-line flow cells, downhole probes, meters) that will be used to make field measurements,
and describe the procedures that will be followed in operating the instruments and recording
the measurements. The QAPjP should describe all instrument calibration procedures,
including the frequency of calibration. The description of calibration procedures should
include: discussion of initial calibration, multi-level calibration for determination of usable
range, periodic calibration checks, conditions that warrant re-calibration of instruments,
acceptable control limits, and the maintenance of calibration records in the field log book. At
a minimum, all field instruments should be calibrated at the beginning of each use and in
accordance with the frequency suggested by the manufacturer. Field instruments should be
calibrated using at least two calibration standards spanning the range of results anticipated
during the sampling event. For example, if ground-water pH is expected to be near pH 7, the
two standards used to calibrate the pH meter should be pH 4 or pH 5, and pH 9 or pH 10,
respectively.
7.5 Sample Containers and Preservation
The procedures employed for sample containerization and preservation are nearly as
important for ensuring the integrity of the samples as the collection device itself.
Investigators should refer to Chapter Two of SW-846 for guidance relating to sample
containers and sample preservation. Detailed procedures for sample containerization,
preservation, packaging, and handling should be provided in the QAPjP. Regardless of the
analytes of concern, exposure of the samples to the ambient air should be minimized.
7.5.1 Sample Containers
The Agency has identified several general performance standards that apply to the
selection and use of sample containers relative to ground-water monitoring. These are as
follows:
The QAPjP should identify the types of sample containers that will be used to
collect ground-water samples, as well as the procedures that the owner/operator
will use to ensure that sample containers are free of contaminants prior to use.
Chapters Three and Four of SW-846 discuss sample container selection and
cleaning for inorganic and organic parameters, respectively.
Clean sample containers should be sealed and stored in a clean environment to
prevent any accumulation of dust or other contaminants. The cleanliness of a
November 1992
7-23
-------
batch of precleaned bottles should be verified in the laboratory. The residue
analysis should be available prior to sampling in the field.
Samples should not be transferred from one sample container to another.
Transferring samples between containers may result in losses of constituents
onto the walls of the container or sample aeration.
To minimize the possibility of volatilization of organic constituents, no
headspace should exist in the containers of samples containing volatile
organics. Immediately after samples designated for volatile organics analysis
have been filled and capped, they should be checked for headspace. In most
cases, the entire sample should be emptied from the container and the container
should be refilled if headspace is noted in the sample. The container should
not be "topped off to fill the additional headspace. If headspace is observed
after samples have been collected, field logs and laboratory analysis reports
should note the headspace, if present, in the sample container(s) at the time of
receipt by the laboratory, as well as at the time the sample was first transferred
to the sample container at the wellhead.
Splitting samples is a common practice. Normally, aliquots from the sampling
device should be alternately emptied into each container receiving a split until
the containers are full. When splitting samples for volatile organics analysis
(VOAs), each VOA container (vial) should be completely filled and sealed —
vials should not be kept open while the sample is distributed between vials.
Samples collected from a well should not be composited in one container for
subsequent transfer to other containers.
7.5.2 Sample Preservation
The QAPjP should identify the methods that will be used to preserve ground-water
samples. Methods of sample preservation are relatively limited, and are generally intended to
1) retard biological action, 2) retard chemical reactions such as hydrolysis or oxidation, and 3)
reduce sorption effects. Preservation methods are generally limited to pH control, chemical
addition, refrigeration, and protection from light. Chapter Two of SW-846 provides specific
information on the required containers, preservation techniques, and holding times for aqueous
matrices. Chemical preservatives should be added to samples in the field. No sample should
be brought back to the laboratory for preservation.
Most commercial shipping containers ("coolers") leak when the interior water level
reaches the lid-body interface. As a result, the carrier may refuse to ship the container. For
this reason, the Agency recommends that two polyethylene overpack bags be used in
shipping. The first will contain the sample bottles, the second the ice needed to keep the
samples at 4°C. If the bags are taped shut, the melt water will not reach the bottle labels or
November 1992
7-24
-------
escape from the cooler. This precaution may not be necessary if "blue" ice or other contained
coolants are used.
As specified in Chapter One of SW-846, a temperature history of the samples should
be maintained as a quality control measure. This is done by recording the temperature on the
chain-of-custody record (Section 7.6) before the sample containers are sealed for shipment.
Upon receipt of the shipment, the laboratory should record the temperature on the
chain-of-custody record.
Holding time refers to the period that begins when the sample is collected from the
well and ends with its extraction or analysis. Holding time is not measured from the time the
laboratory receives the samples.
7.6 Chain-of-Custody and Records Management
A chain-of-custody procedure should be designed to allow the owner/operator to
reconstruct how and under what circumstances a sample was collected, including any
problems encountered. Chapter One of SW-846 contains a complete description of chain-of-
custody and records management. The chain-of-custody procedure is intended to prevent
misidentification of the samples, to prevent tampering with the samples during shipping and
storage, to allow easy identification of any tampering, and to allow for the easy tracking of
possession.
7.6.1 Sample Labels
To prevent sample misidentification, the owner/operator should affix a label to each
sample container. Sample labels should be sufficiently durable to remain legible even when
wet. Sample labels should contain, at a minimum, the following information:
Sample identification number;
Name and signature of collector;
Date and time of collection;
Place of collection; and
Parameters requested (if space permits).
The samples can be labeled by recording the above information directly on the sample
containers. Alternatively, the owner/operator may use multiple-part labels consisting of a
unique identification number that is placed on the container. At least two copies of the
descriptive information for the samples (referenced to the identification number) should be
November 1992
7-25
-------
made. One copy should be kept in a separate file or logbook, and a second copy should be
shipped with the samples to the laboratory.
7.6.2 Sample Custody Seal
In cases where samples leave the owner/operator's immediate control (e.g., shipment
to laboratory), a custody seal should be placed on the shipping container or on the individual
sample bottles. Custody seals provide prevention or easy detection of sample tampering. The
custody seal should bear the signature of the collector and the date signed. The custody seal
can be placed on the front and back of a cooler, around the opening of a polyethylene
overpack bag or on the lid of each sample container. Caution should be exercised in doing
any of the above. Experience has shown that the seal may not always adhere to plastic
coolers, and that the coolers may arrive at the destination without the appropriate seal.
Sometimes the sample containers become wet from melting ice or condensation; thus, while
their labels will stick, their custody seals may not. Taping over the seal with a transparent
tape generally solves this problem. A similar solution can be applied to the cooler lids.
7.6.3 Field Logbook
If a sample analysis produces an unexpected or unexplainable result, it will be
necessary to determine if the circumstances of sample collection, rather than a change in the
ground-water quality, are responsible. Examination of the field logbook is critical in this
process. A field log should be kept each time ground-water monitoring activities are
conducted in the field. The field logbook should document the following:
Well identification;
Well depth;
Static water level depth and measurement technique;
Presence and thickness of immiscible layers and detection method;
Well yield (high or low) and well recovery after purging (slow, fast);
Well purging procedure and equipment;
Purge volume and pumping rate;
Time well purged;
Collection method for immiscible layers;
November 1992
7-26
-------
Sample withdrawal procedure and equipment;
Date and time of collection;
Well sampling sequence;
Types of sample bottles used and sample identification numbers;
Preservatives used;
Parameters requested for analysis;
Field observations of sampling event;
Name of collector;
Weather conditions, including air temperature; and
Internal temperature of field and shipping containers.
7.6.4 Chain-of-Custody Record
The tracing of sample possession will be accomplished by use of a chain-of-custody
record as described in Chapter One of SW-846. A chain-of-custody record should be
completed and should accompany every sample shipment. The chain-of-custody record
should contain enough copies so that each person possessing the shipment receives his/her
own copy. At a minimum, the chain-of-custody record should contain the following
information:
Sample number;
Signature of collector;
Date and time of collection;
Sample type (e.g., ground water);
Identification of sampling point (well);
Number of containers;
Analyses requested;
November 1992
7-27
-------
Preservatives used;
Signature of persons involved in the chain of possession;
Inclusive dates and times of possession;
Internal temperature of shipping container when samples were sealed into the
container for shipping;
Internal temperature of container when opened at the laboratory; and
Remarks section to identify potential hazards or to relay other information to
the laboratory.
7.6.5 Sample Analysis Request Sheet
The sample analysis request sheet should accompany the sample(s) on delivery to the
laboratory and clearly identify which sample containers have been designated for each
requested parameter. The sample analysis request sheet may be included in, or be a part of,
the chain-of-custody record. The addition of preservatives should be noted on the sample
analysis request sheet. The sample analysis request sheet should include the following
information:
Name of person receiving the sample;
Name and addresses of analytical laboratory;
Laboratory sample number (if different from field number);
Date of sample receipt;
Analyses requested;
Internal temperature of shipping container upon opening in the laboratory; and
Preservatives added in the field.
November 1992
7-28
-------
7.6.6 Laboratory Logbook
Once the sample has been received in the laboratory, the sample custodian and/or
laboratory personnel should clearly document the processing steps that are applied to the
sample. All sample preparation techniques and instrumental methods used should be
identified in the laboratory logbook. Experimental conditions, such as the use of specific
reagents, temperatures, reaction times, and instrument settings, should be noted. The results
of the analyses of all laboratory quality control samples should be identified, specific to each
batch of ground-water samples analyzed. The laboratory logbook should include the time,
date, and name of the person who performed each processing step.
7.7 Analytical Procedures
The QAPjP submitted as part of the permit application should describe in detail the
analytical procedures that will be used to determine the concentrations of constituents or
parameters of interest. These procedures should include suitable analytical methods as well
as proper quality assurance and quality control protocols. Minimum procedures specified in
Chapter One of SW-846 for QAPjPs should be satisfied.
The QAPjP included as part of the permit application should identify an analytical
method that will be used for each specific parameter or target analyte, and that can achieve
the required detection limits. The following should be addressed:
For SW-846 analytical methods, reference SW-846 and the analysis methods
(by method number), including all sample preparation methods. For modified
SW-846, or other standard methods, the analytical procedure and method
detection limits to be used should be documented in the format of a Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP).
For analysis by non-SW-846 methods, the following should be provided:
approval of the Regional Administrator for standardized
methods;
for EPA or standardized methods, a reference to the source of
the method; and
for non-standard methods, a complete SOP with method
detection limit should be included as an integrated part of the
S&A program to be approved by the Regional Administrator and
specified in the permit. Minimum procedures specified in
Chapter One of SW-846 for QAPjPs should be satisfied.
November 1992
7-29
-------
7.8 Field and Laboratory Quality Assurance/Quality Control
One of the fundamental responsibilities of the owner/operator is the establishment of
continuing programs to ensure the reliability and validity of field and analytical laboratory
data gathered as part of the overall ground-water monitoring program. Chapter One of SW-
846 provides guidance on establishing and maintaining field and laboratory quality control
programs. Specifically, Chapter One of SW-846 provides guidance for the following areas:
Control samples;
Acceptance criteria;
Deviations;
Corrective action for sampling and analysis procedures;
Data handling;
Laboratory control samples;
Method blanks; and
Matrix-specific effects.
The owner/operator's QAPjP should explicitly describe the QA/QC program that will
be used in the field and laboratory. The Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) of the project
should be described in terms of precision, accuracy, completeness, representativeness and
comparability for field activities (sampling, measurements, and screening) and laboratory
analyses, including the project required acceptance limits and means to achieve these QA
objectives. Chapter One of SW-846 provides a discussion of DQOs. The QAPjP should
specify the preventative maintenance procedures that will be used for field and laboratory
instruments and ground-water monitoring wells. A table showing the type of maintenance to
be performed and the frequency is appropriate. Many owner/operators use commercial
laboratories to conduct analyses of ground-water samples. When commercial laboratories are
contracted by the owner/operator to analyze ground-water samples, the owner/operator's
QAPjP should be used by the laboratory analyzing the samples for the owner/operator.
As described in Section 3.4.1 of Chapter One of SW-846, both field and laboratory
QC samples should be prepared during the sampling event. Chapter One of SW-846
recommends that the following samples be analyzed with each batch of samples (a batch may
not exceed 20 samples):
November 1992
7-30
-------
One field duplicate;
One equipment rinsate (required only when non-disposable equipment is being
used);
One matrix spike (when appropriate for the method); and
One duplicate sample (either a matrix duplicate or a matrix spike duplicate).
Chapter One of SW-846 recommends that a trip blank be prepared and analyzed when
samples are being analyzed for volatile organic analytes. A trip blank should be submitted
with samples each day that samples are collected.
Section 4.4.3 of Chapter One of SW-846 also recommends that the matrix-specific
detection limit be determined. This determination does not need to be made on a sample
batch basis, but should be made whenever the matrix is suspected to have altered, or as
frequently as necessary to document that the matrix has not altered. For an aquifer with
relatively static hydrogeological characteristics, this may mean making a matrix-specific
detection limit determination twice annually.
7.8.1 Field QA/QC Program
The owner/operator's QAPjP should provide for the routine collection and analysis of
QC samples to verify that the sample collection and handling process has not affected the
quality of the ground-water samples. All field QC samples should be prepared exactly as
regular investigation samples with regard to sample volume, containers, and preservation.
The concentrations of any contaminants found in blank samples should not be used to correct
the ground-water data. The contaminant concentrations in blanks should be documented, and
if the concentrations are more than an order of magnitude greater than the field sample
results, the owner/operator should resample the ground water. The owner/operator should
prepare the QC samples as recommended in Chapter One of SW-846, at the frequency
recommended by Chapter One of SW-846, and analyze them for all of the required
monitoring parameters. Other QA/QC practices such as sampling equipment calibration,
equipment decontamination procedures, and chain-of-custody procedures are discussed in
other sections of this Chapter and should be described in the owner/operator's QAPjP.
7.8.2 Laboratory QA/QC Program
The owner/operator's QAPjP should provide for the use of control samples, as defined
in Chapter One of SW-846. The owner/operator should use appropriate statistical procedures
to monitor and document performance and to implement an effective program to resolve
testing problems (e.g., instrument maintenance, operator training). Data from control samples
(e.g., spiked samples, duplicates, and blanks) should be used as a measure of performance or
November 1992
7-31
-------
as an indicator of potential sources of cross-contamination. All QC data should be submitted
to the Agency with the ground-water monitoring sample results. Chapter One of SW-846
provides guidance for laboratory QA/QC programs.
7.9 Evaluation of the Quality of Ground-Water Data
A ground-water sampling and analysis program produces a variety of hydrogeological,
geophysical, and ground-water analytical data. This section pertains primarily to the
evaluation of analytical data. These data are required by the Subpart F regulations to be
evaluated using the statistical tests outlined in §264.97(h). The results of these tests provide
the fundamental evidence used to determine whether the facility is contaminating the ground
water. Details regarding the specific protocols of these procedures are discussed in
"Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring Data at RCRA Facilities," Interim Final
Guidance (USEPA, 1989a) and any subsequent addenda to this guidance. The analytical data
may be presented to the owner or operator via electronic transmittal or on reporting sheets.
These data then should be compiled and statistically analyzed by the owner/operator prior to
submission to the state or to EPA. If data are to be transmitted electronically, the
owner/operator should discuss the procedures with EPA regional or state staff to ensure that
all software and hardware being used are compatible.
The following guidelines should help to ensure that units of measure associated with
data values are reported consistently and unambiguously:
The units of measure should accompany each target analyte. Laboratory data
sheets that include the statement "values are reported in ppm unless otherwise
noted" are discouraged, and at least should be examined in detail by the
technical reviewer. It is common to find errors in the units of measure on this
type of data reporting sheet, especially when the reporting sheets have been
prepared manually.
The units of measure for a given target analyte should be consistent throughout
the report.
Owner/operators should ensure that during chemical analysis, laboratory reporting,
computer automation, and report preparation, data are generated and processed to avoid
mistakes, and that data are complete and fully documented. Analytical data submitted to the
Agency should contain the date/time the sample was collected, the date/time the sample was
received by the laboratory, the date/time the sample was extracted, and the date/time the
sample was analyzed.
November 1992
7-32
-------
APPENDIX 1
BIBLIOGRAPHY
November 1992
-------
1. Alexander, B.C., Jr. 1987. The Karst Hydrogeology of Southeastern Minnesota, in
Balaban, N.H., ed., Field Trip Guidebook for the Upper Mississippi Valley: Minnesota,
Iowa, and Wisconsin, Minnesota Geological Survey Guidebook Series No. 15, prepared
for the 21st Annual Meeting of the North-Central Section of the Geological Society of
America, St. Paul, Minnesota, pp. 1-22.
2. Aley, T. 1988. Complex Radial Flow of Ground Water in Flat-lying Residuum-mantled
Limestone in the Arkansas Ozarks. Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Environmental
Problems in Karst Terranes and Their Solutions, Nashville, pp. 159-170.
3. Aller, L., T.W. Bennett, G. Hackett, R.J. Petty, J.H. Lehr, H. Sedoris, D.M. Nielsen, and
I.E. Denne. 1989. Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and Installation of
Ground-Water Monitoring Wells. EPA/EMSL-Las Vegas, USEPA Cooperative
Agreement CR-812350-01, EPA/600/4-89/034, NTIS #PB90-159807, 398 pp.
4. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1989. Deep, Quasi-Static, Cone
and Friction-Cone Penetration Tests of Soil. D3441-86, 1989 Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Philadelphia, pp. 414-419.
5. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Subcommittee D18.2105 on Design
and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells. 1989. Draft Standard, Proposed
Recommended Practice for Design and Installation of Ground Water Monitoring Wells
in Aquifers. ASTM, 47 pp.
6. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1986. Standard Specification for
Poly (vinyl chloride) (PVC) Plastic Pipe, Schedules 40, 80, and 120. D1785, 1987 Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia, pp. 89-101.
7. American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1981. Standard Specification for
Thermoplastic Water Well Casing Pipe and Couplings Made in Standard Dimension
Ratios (SDR). F-480, 1987 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia, pp.
1028-1033.
8. American Water Works Association. 1984. Appendix I: Abandonment of Test Holes,
Partially Completed Wells and Completed Wells. American Water Works Association
Standard for Water Wells, American Water Works Association, Denver, Colorado, pp. 45-
47.
9. Atkinson, T.C. 1977. Diffuse Flow and Conduct Flow in Limestone Terrain in the
Mendip Hills, Somerset (Great Britain). Journal of Hydrology, v. 35. pp. 93-110.
10. Barari, A. and L.S. Hedges. 1985. Movement of Water in Glacial Till. Proceedings of
the 17th International Congress of the International Association of Hydrogeologists, pp.
129-134.
Al-1 November 1992
-------
11. Barcelona, M.J., H.A. Wehrmann, J.F. Keely, and W.A. Pettyjohn. 1990. Contamination
of Ground Water: Prevention, Assessment Restoration. Pollution Technology Review
No. 184, Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge, NJ, 213 pp.
12. Barcelona, M.J., H.A. Wehrmann, M.R. Schock, M.E. Sievers, and J.R. Karny. 1989.
Sampling Frequency for Ground-Water Quality Monitoring. EPA Project Summary.
EPA/600/S4-89/032, NTIS: PB-89-233-522/AS.
13. Barcelona, M.J., O.K. George, and M.R. Schock. 1988a. Comparison of Water Samples
from PTFE, PVC, and SS Monitoring Wells. USEPA Cooperative Agreement
#CR812165-02, 37 pp.
14. Barcelona, M.J., J.A. Helfrich, and E.E. Garske. 1988b. Verification of Sampling
Methods and Selection of Materials for Ground-Water Contamination Studies, in A.G.
Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods. ASTM STP
963, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 221-231.
15. Barcelona, M.J., and J.A. Helfrich. 1988. Laboratory and Field Studies of Well-casing
Material Effects, in Proc. of the Ground Water Geochemistry Conference, National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 363-375.
16. Barcelona, M.J., and J.P. Gibb. 1988. Development of Effective Ground-Water Sampling
Protocols, in A.G. Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field
Methods, ASTM STP 963, ASTM, Philadelphia, pp. 17-26.
17. Barcelona, M.J., and J.A. Helfrich. 1986. Well Construction and Purging Effects on
Ground-Water Samples: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 20, No. 11, pp.
1179-1184.
18. Barcelona, M.J., J.A. Helfrich, and E.E. Garske. 1985a. Sampling Tubing Effects on
Ground-Water Samples. Analytical Chemistry, pp. 460-464.
19. Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich, and E.E. Garske. 1985b. Practical Guide for
Ground-Water Sampling, USEPA, Cooperative Agreement #CR-809966-01,
EPA/600/2-85/104, 169 pp.
20. Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, and R.A. Miller. 1983. A Guide to the Selection of Materials
for Monitoring Well Construction and Ground-Water Sampling. Illinois State Water
Survey (ISWS), Champaign, IL. ISWS Contract Report 327, 68 pp.
21. Beck, B.F. 1986. Ground-Water Monitoring Considerations in Karst on Young
Limestones. Proceedings of the Conference on Environmental Problems in Karst Terranes
and Their Solutions, pp. 229-248.
Al-2 November 1992
-------
22. Benson, R.A. Glaccum, and M.R. Noel. 1982. Geophysical Techniques for Sensing
Buried Wastes and Waste Migration, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Office of Research and Development, US EPA, Contract No. 68-03-3050, 236 pp.
23. Beres, M., Jr., and P.P. Haeni. 1991. Application of Ground-Penetrating Radar Methods
in Hydrogeologic Studies. Ground Water, v. 29, pp. 375-386.
24. Blegen, R.P., J.W. Hess, F.L. Miller, R.R. Kinnison, and I.E. Denne. 1988. Field
Comparison of Ground-Water Sampling Methods — Interim Report. USEPA Cooperative
Agreement #CR 812713-01-3, 35 pp.
25. Boettner, E.A., G.L. Ball, Z. Hollingsworth, and R. Aquino. 1981. Organic and
Organotin Compounds Leached from PVC and CPVC Pipe. USEPA report
EPA-600/1-81-062, 102 pp.
26. Butler, D.K., and J.R. Curro, Jr. 1981. Crosshole Seismic Testing - Procedures and
Pitfalls. Geophysics, v. 46, No. 1, pp. 23-29.
27. Cantor, L.W., R.C. Knox, and D.M. Fairchild. 1987. Ground-Water Quality Protection.
Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan.
28. Casper, J.W. 1980. Remote Sensing Evaluation of the Potential for Sinkhole Occurrence.
University of Florida, Thesis for Degree of Master of Engineering, 116 pp.
29. Cooper, H.H., Jr. and C.E. Jacob. 1946. A Generalized Graphical Method for Evaluating
Formation Constants and Summarizing Well-Field History. Am. Geophys. Union Trans.,
v. 27, No. 4, pp. 526-534.
30. Cowgill, U.M. 1988. The Chemical Composition of Leachate from a Two-Week Dwell-
Time Study of PVC Well Casing and Three-Week Dwell-Time Study of Fiberglass
Reinforced Epoxy Well Casing, in A.G. Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water
Contamination: Field Methods. ASTM STP 963, American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 172-184.
31. Curran, C. M., and M. B. Tomson. 1983. Leaching of Trace Organics into Water from
Five Common Plastics. Ground Water Monitoring Review, Summer, pp. 68-71.
32. Dablow, John S. Ill, G. Walker, and D. Persico. 1988. Design Consideration and
Installation Techniques for Monitoring Wells Cased with TEFLON PTFE, in A.G.
Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods. ASTM STP
963, ASTM, Philadelphia, pp. 199-205.
Al-3 November 1992
-------
33. Dalton, M.G., B.E. Huntsman, and K. Bradbury. 1991. Acquisition and Interpretation
of Water-Level Data, in D.M. Nielsen, ed., Practical Handbook of Ground-Water
Monitoring. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 367-395.
34. Daniel, D.E., H.M. Liljestrand, G.P. Broderick, and JJ. Bowders, Jr. 1988. Interaction
of Earthen Liner Materials with Industrial Waste Leachate in Hazardous Waste and
Hazardous Materials, v. 5, No. 2, pp. 93-108.
35. Davis, S.N., DJ. Campbell, H.W. Bentley, and T.J. Flynn. 1985. Groundwater Tracers
National Water Well Association, Worthington, Ohio, 200 pp.
36. Davis, S.N. 1969. Porosity and Permeability of Natural Materials, in R.J.M. De Wiest,
ed., Flow Through Porous Media. Academic Press, New York, pp. 54-89.
37. DeLuca, RJ. 1986. The Importance of Field Data Acquisition in Hydrogeologic
Investigations at Hazardous Waste Sites. Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on
Management of Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Washington, pp. 148-151.
38. Dobecki, T.L., and P.R. Romig. 1985. Geotechnical and Ground Water Geophysics.
Geophysics, v. 50, No. 12, pp. 2621-2636.
39. Dowd, R.M. 1987. Review of Studies Concerning Effects of Well Casing Materials on
Trace Measurements of Organic Compounds. American Society of Testing and Materials,
National Water Well Association, and American Petroleum Institute Joint Workshop on
Ground-water Monitoring Standards Development, Tampa, Florida, January 22-23.
40. Driscoll, F.G. 1986. Ground Water and Wells, 2nd edition. Johnson Division, St. Paul,
Minnesota, 1089 pp.
41. Dunbar, D., H. Tuchfeld, R. Siegel, and R. Sterbentz. 1985. Ground-Water Quality
Anomalies Encountered During Well Construction, Sampling, and Analysis in the
Environs of a Hazardous Waste Management Facility. Ground Water Monitoring Review,
Summer, pp. 70-74.
42. Dunham, R.J. 1962. Classification of Carbonate Rocks According to Deposit!onal
Texture, in W.E. Ham, ed., Classification of Carbonate Rocks: AAPG Memoir 1, pp.
108-121.
43. Du Pont, reference 1. TEFLON Fluorocarbon Resin: Mechanical Design Data. E.I.
DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, 60 pp.
44. Du Pont, reference 2. Cold Facts About "Cold-flow." The Journal of TEFLON, Reprint
no. 39, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, 2 pp.
Al-4 November 1992
-------
45. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1986. Changes in the Chemical Integrity of
Groundwater Samples due to Sampling Devices and Procedures. EPRI Environment
Division Technical Brief RP2485-7, 2 pp.
46. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1985a. Field Measurement Methods for
Hydrogeologic Investigations: A Critical Review of the Literature. EPRI Report
EA-4301, Research Project 2485-7, Palo Alto, California, 260 pp.
47. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1985b. Preliminary Results on Chemical
Changes in Groundwater Samples due to Sampling Devices. EPRI Report EA-4118,
Research Project 2485-7, Palo Alto, California, 54 pp.
48. Ellis, D.V. 1987. Well Logging for Earth Scientists. Elsevier, New York, 532 pp.
49. Embry, A.F., and I.E. Kloven. 1971. A Late Devonian Reef Tract on Northeastern
Banks Island, Northwest Terratories: Canadian Petroleum Geology Bulletin, v. 19, pp.
730-781.
50. Evans, R.B., E.N. Koghlin, and K.W. Brown. 1987. Ground-Water Monitoring: Quality
Assurance for RCRA. USEPA, EPA-600/X-87-415.
51. Fetter, C.W. 1983. Potential Sources of Contamination in Ground-Water Monitoring.
Ground Water Monitoring Review, Spring, pp. 60-64.
52. Fetter, C.W., Jr. 1980. Applied Hydrogeology. Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co.,
Columbus, Ohio, 488 pp.
53. Field, M.S. 1988. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Strategy for Ground-Water
Quality Monitoring at Hazardous Waste Land Disposal Facilities in Karst Terranes, in
Karst Hydrogeology and Karst Environmental Protection, Proceedings of the International
Association of Hydrogeologists (21st Congress, Guilin, China), v. II, pp. 1006-1011.
54. Field, M.S. 1987. An EPA Evaluation of the Site Geology as it Applies to the Minimum
Technological Requirements Exemption Request Submitted by E.I. du Pont Pompton
Lakes Works Facility. U.S. EPA-Region II Air & Waste Management Division.
EPA/902/8-87-002. 75 pp.
55. Ford, D., and P. Williams. 1989. Karst Geomorphology and Hydrology. Unwin Hyman
Ltd., London, 601 pp.
56. Fountain, L.S. 1976. Subsurface Cavity Detection: Field Evaluation of Radar, Gravity,
and Earth Resistivity Methods. Subsidence Over Mines and Caverns, Moisture and Frost
Actions, and Classification, Transportation Research Record 612, Transportation Research
Board, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 38-46.
Al-5 November 1992
-------
57. Freeze, R.A., and J.A. Cherry. 1979. Groundwater. Prentice Hall Publishing Co., Inc.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 604 pp.
58. Garstang, M., P. Price, and MJ. Navin. 1989. Engineering and Environmental Geology
of the St. Louis Area, in J.D. Vineyard and W.K. Wedge, compilers, Geological Society
of America 1989 Field Trip Guidebook, Missouri Dept. of Nat. Resources, Special Publ.
No. 5, pp. 105-120.
59. Gass, I.E., J.F. Barker, R. Dickhout, and J.S. Fyfe. 1991. Test Results of the Grundfos
Ground-Water Sampling Pump. Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on Aquifer
Restoration and Ground Water Monitoring.
60. Gibb, J.P., and M. Barcelona. 1984. Sampling for Organic Contaminants in Ground
Water. Jour. AWWA, v. 76, No. 5, May, pp. 48-51.
61. Gillham, R.W. and S.F. O'Hannesin. 1990. Sorption of Aromatic Hydrocarbons by
Materials Used in Construction of Ground-Water Sampling Wells, in D.M. Nielsen and
A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water and Vadose Zone Monitoring. ASTM STP 1053,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 108-122.
62. Gillham, R.W., M.J.L. Robin, J.F. Barker, and J.A. Cherry. 1985. Field Evaluation of
Well Flushing Procedures. American Petroleum Institute, Environmental Affairs
Department, 109 pp.
63. Gillham, R.W., M.J.L. Robin, J.F. Barker, and J.A. Cherry. 1983. Ground Water
Monitoring and Sample Bias, American Petroleum Institute, API Publication No. 4367,
206 pp.
64. Griss, T.E. 1989. Monitoring Wells in Non-Aquifers Formations. Water Well Journal,
pp. 27-28.
65. Hamblin, K.W. and J.D. Howard. 1975. Exercises in Physical Geology, 4th Edition.
66. Hamilton, H. 1985. Selection of Materials in Testing and Purifying Water. Ultra Pure
Water, January-February, 3 pp.
67. Heath, R.C. 1982. Basic Ground-Water Hydrology. U.S. Geological Survey Water
Supply Paper 2220, 84 pp.
68. Hem, J.D. 1989. Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural
Water, U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2254, 3rd Edition, 263 pp.
Al-6 November 1992
-------
69. Herzog, B., J. Pennine, and G. Nielsen. 1991. Ground-Water Sampling, in D.M. Nielsen,
ed., Practical Handbook of Ground-Water Monitoring. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI,
pp. 449-499.
70. Hewitt, A.D. 1992a. Potential of Common Well Casing Materials to Influence Aqueous
Metal Concentrations. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Spring, pp. 131-136.
71. Hewitt, A.D. 1989. Leaching of Metal Pollutants from Four Well Casings Used for
Ground Water Monitoring. CRREL Special Report 89-32, U.S. Army Cold Regions
Research and Engineering Lab, Hanover, N.H. 03755-1290.
72. Hinze, WJ. 1988. Gravity and Magnetic Methods Applied to Engineering and
Environmental Problems. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of
Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, March 28-31, 1988, Golden,
Colorado. Sponsored by the Society of Engineering and Mineral Exploration
Geophysicists, pp. 1-107.
73. Houghton, R.L., and M.E. Berger. 1984. Effects of Well Casing Composition and
Sampling Method on Apparent Quality of Ground Water. Proceedings of the Fourth
National Symposium and Exposition on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water
Monitoring, pp. 203-213.
74. Hsieh, P.A., and S.P. Neuman. 1985. Field Determination of the Three-Dimensional
Hydraulic Conductivity Tensor of Anisotropic Media, 1. Theory. Water Resources
Research, v. 21, No. 11, pp. 1655-1665.
75. Hunter, J.A., S.E. Pullan, R.A. Burns, R.M. Gagne, and R.L. Good. 1984. Shallow
Reflection Mapping of the Overburden Bedrock Interface with the Engineering
Seismograph - Some Simple Techniques. Geophysics, v. 49, No. 8, pp. 1381-1385.
76. Imbrigiotta, T.E., J. Gibs, T.V. Fusillo, G.R. Kish, and J.J. Hochreiter. 1988. Field
Evaluation of Seven Sampling Devices for Purgeable Organic Compounds in A.G. Collins
and AJ. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods. ASTM STP 963,
ASTM, Philadelphia, pp. 258-273.
77. Jansen, J., and R.T. Taylor. 1988. Surface Geophysical Techniques for Fracture
Detection. Proceedings of the Second Conference on Environmental Problems in Karst
Terranes and Their Solutions, pp. 419-441.
78. Jennings, K.V. 1988. A Practical Approach to Corrective Action in Karst Terranes.
Proceedings of the 20th Mid-Atlantic Industrial Waste Conference, Hazardous and
Industrial Waste. Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, Silver Spring,
Maryland, pp. 371-376.
Al-7 November 1992
-------
79. Johnson, W.J., and D.W. Johnson. 1986. Pitfalls of Geophysics in Characterizing
Underground Hazardous Waste. Proceedings of the 7th National Conference on
Management of Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Washington, D.C., pp. 227-232.
80. Jones, J.N. and G.D. Miller. 1988. Adsorption of Selected Organic Contaminants onto
Possible Well Casing Materials, in A.G. Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground-Water
Contamination: Field Methods. ASTM STP 963, American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 185-198.
81. Jones, W.K. 1973. Hydrology of Limestone Karst in Greenbrier County, West Virginia.
West Virginia Economic and Geologic Survey Bulletin 36, 49 pp.
82. Junk, G.A., H.J. Svec, R.D. Vick, and M.J. Avery. 1974. Contamination of Water by
Synthetic Polymer Tubes, Environmental Science and Technology, v. 8, No. 13, pp.
1100-1106.
83. Kearl, P.M., N.E. Korte, and T.A. Cronk. 1992. Suggested Modifications to Ground
Water Sampling Procedures Based on Observations from the Colloidal Borescope.
Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Spring, pp. 155-160.
84. Keeley, J.F. and K. Boateng. 1987. Monitoring Well Installation, Purging, and Sampling
Techniques - Part I: Conceptualizations. Ground Water, v. 25, no. 3, pp. 300-313.
85. Keys, W.S. 1988. Borehole Geophysics Applied to Ground-Water Investigations. U.S.
Geological Survey Open File Report 87-539.
86. Keys, W.S. and L.M. MacCary. 1971. Application of Borehole Geophysics to Water-
Resources Investigations. Techniques of Water Resources Investigations of the United
States Geological Survey, Book 2, Chapter El, 126 pp.
87. Kresse, F.C. 1985. Exploration for Ground-Water Contamination. Bull. Assoc. of
Engineering Geologists, v. 22, pp. 275-280.
88. Kruseman, G.P., and N.A. deRidder. 1989. Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test
Data, International Institute for Land Reclamation and Improvement/ILRI, Bulletin II, 4th
Edition, 200 pp.
89. Labo, J. 1986. A Practical Introduction to Borehole Geophysics. Geophysical
References, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, v. 2.
90. Lamb, B., and T. Kinney. 1989. Decommissioning Wells - Techniques and Pitfalls.
Third National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer Restoration, Ground Water
Monitoring and Geophysical Methods, NWWA, May 22-25, 1989, pp. 217-228.
Al-8 November 1992
-------
91. Lang, K.T., M.H. Stutz, L.V. Parker, A.D. Hewitt, and T.F. Jenkins. 1989. Influence of
Well Casing Materials on Chemical Species in Ground Water. Proceedings of the Fifth
Annual Waste Testing and Quality Assurance Symposium, Washington, p. 29.
92. Lloyde, J.W. and J.A. Heathcote. 1985. National Inorganic Hydrochemistry in Relation
to Ground Water: An Introduction. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England.
93. Lytle, R.J., D.L. Lager, E.F. Laine, J.D. Salisbury, and J.T. Okada. 1981. Fluid-Flow
Monitoring Using Electromagnetic Probing. Geophysical Prospecting, v. 29, pp. 627-638.
94. Lytle, R.J., E.F. Laine, D.L. Lager, and D.T. Davis. 1979. Cross-Borehole
Electromagnetic Probing to Locate High-Contrast Anomalies. Geophysics, v. 44, No. 10,
pp. 1667-1676.
95. Marsh, J.M., and J.W. Lloyd. 1980. Details of Hydrochemical Variations in Flowing
Wells. Ground Water, v. 18, pp. 336-373.
96. McGlew, P.J., and J.E. Thomas. 1984. Determining Contaminant Migration Pathways
in Fractured Bedrock. Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Management of
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, pp. 150-157.
97. McNeill, J.D. 1980. Electromagnetic Terrain Conductivity Measurement at Low
Induction Numbers. Geomics Limited Technical Note TN-6, 15 pp.
98. McWhorter, D.B. and O.K. Sunada. 1977. Ground-Water Hydrology and Hydraulics.
Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, Colorado, 290 pp.
99. Miller, G.D. 1982. Uptake and Release of Lead, Chromium, and Trace Level Volatile
Organics Exposed to Synthetic Well Casings. Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water Monitoring, pp. 236-245.
100. Millison, D., T. Eckard, J. Muller, E. Vander Velde. 1989. Use of a Continuous
Sampling Wireline System and Telescopic Casing to Optimize Well Construction and
Prevent Cross-Contamination in Deep Monitor Well Installations. Third National Outdoor
Action Conference on Aquifer Restoration, Ground Water Monitoring and Geophysical
Methods, NWWA, May 22-25, 1989, pp. 273-287.
101. Moberly, R.L. 1985. Equipment Decontamination. Ground Water Age, v. 19, No. 8, pp.
36-39.
102. Molz, F.J., O. Guven, and J.G. Melville. 1990. A New Approach and Methodologies for
Characterizing the Hydrogeologic Properties of Aquifers. EPA Project Summary. EPA
600/52-90/002.
Al-9 November 1992
-------
103. Molz, F.J., R.H. Morin, A.E. Hess, J.G. Melville, and O. Guven. 1989. The Impeller
Meter for Measuring Aquifer Permeability Variations: Evaluation and Comparison With
Other Tests. Water Resources Research, v. 25, No. 7, pp. 1677-1683.
104. Mooney, H.M. 1980. Handbook of Engineering Geophysics, Vol. 2. Electrical
Resistivity. Bison Instruments, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota.
105. Mooney, H.M., and W.W. Wetzel. 1956. The Potentials About a Point Electrode and
Apparent Resistivity Curves for a Two-, Three- and Four-Layer Earth. University of
Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, 145 pp.
106. Morey, R.M. 1974. Continuous Subsurface Profiling by Impulse Radar. Proceedings of
Engineering Foundation Conference on Subsurface Exploration for Underground
Excavations and Heavy Construction, American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 213-231.
107. Morrison, R.D. 1984. Ground-Water Monitoring Technology Procedures, Equipment,
and Applications. Timco Mfg., Inc., Prairie du Sac, Wisconsin, 111 pp.
108. Musgrove, R.H., J.T. Barraclough, and R.G. Grantham. 1965. Water Resources of
Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida: Florida Geological Survey, Report of
Investigations No. 40, 102 pp.
109. Nacht, SJ. 1983. Monitoring Sampling Protocol Considerations. Ground-Water
Monitoring Review, Summer, pp. 23-28.
110. Nass, L.I. 1976. Encyclopedia of PVC, Vols. I and II. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York,
1249 pp.
111. National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Technical Committee T-6A. 1956. Report
on Rigid Polyvinyl Chloride. Corrosion, v. 12, pp. 183t-186t.
112. National Sanitation Foundation. 1988. National Sanitation Foundation Standard 14, Ann
Arbor, MI, 65 pp.
113. National Water Well Association. 1985. Proc. NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Groundwater Investigations, Fort North, Texas.
114. National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute. 1981. Manual on the
Selection and Installation of Thermoplastic Water Well Casing. National Water Well
Association, Worthington, Ohio, 64 pp.
115. Nielsen, D.M. and R. Schalla. 1991. Design and Installation of Ground-Water
Monitoring Wells, in D.M. Nielsen, ed., Practical Handbook of Ground-Water Monitoring.
Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp. 239-331.
Al-10 November 1992
-------
116. Nielsen, D.M. and G.L. Yeates. 1985. A Comparison of Sampling Mechanisms
Available for Small-Diameter Ground Water Monitoring Wells. Proceedings of the 5th
National Symposium and Exposition on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water
Monitoring, pp. 237-270.
117. Nielsen, D.M. and M. Curl, Eds. 1984. Proc. NWWA/EPA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Groundwater Investigations, San Antonio, Texas.
118. Palmer, C.D., J.F. Keely, and W. Fish. 1987. Potential for Solute Retardation on
Monitoring Well Sand Packs and its Effect on Purging Requirements for Ground-Water
Sampling. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, v. 7, pp. 40-47.
119. Parker, L.V. 1991. Discussion of "The Effects of Latex Gloves and Nylon Cord on
Ground Water Sample Quality" by J.L. Canova and M.G. Muthig. Ground Water
Monitoring Review, Fall 1991, pp. 167-168.
120. Parker, L.V., A.D. Hewitt, and T.F. Jenkins. 1990. Influence of Casing Materials on
Trace-Level Chemicals in Well Water. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Spring, pp.
146-156.
121. Parker, L.V., T.F. Jenkins, and P.B. Black. 1989. Evaluation of Four Well Casing
Materials for Monitoring Selected Trace Level Organics in Ground Water. CRREL
Report 89-18, U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover,
NH 03775.
122. Parker, L.V., and T.F. Jenkins. 1986. Suitability of Polyvinyl Chloride Well Casings for
Monitoring Munitions in Ground Water. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, v. 6, pp.
92-98.
123. Paul, C.J. and R.W. Puls. 1992. Comparison of Ground-Water Sampling Devices Based
on Equilibration of Water Quality Indicator Parameters. Proceedings of the National
Groundwater Sampling Symposium, November 30, 1992, Washington D.C., pp. 21-39.
124. Pearsall, K.A. and D.A.V. Eckhardt. 1987. Effects of Selected Sampling Equipment and
Procedures on the Concentrations of Trichloroethylene and Related Compounds in Ground
Water Samples. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Spring, pp. 64-73.
125. Penrose, W.R., W.L. Polzer, E.H. Essington, D.M. Nelson, and K.A. Orlandini. 1990.
Mobility of Plutonium and Americium through a Shallow Aquifer in a Semiarid Region.
Environmental Science and Technology, v. 24, pp. 228-234.
126. Pettijohn, F.J., P.E. Potter and R. Siever. 1972. Sand and Sandstone. Springer-Verlag,
New York, 618 pp.
Al-11 November 1992
-------
127. Pohlmann, K.F. and J.W. Hess. 1988. Generalized Ground Water Sampling Device
Matrix. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Fall, pp. 82-84.
128. Pohlmann, K.F., R.P. Blegen, J.W. Hess, and I.E. Denne. Undated. Field Comparison
of Ground-Water Sampling Devices for Hazardous Waste Sites: An Evaluation Using
Volatile Organic Compounds, USEPA Office of Research and Development, EMSL-Las
Vegas, USEPA Cooperative Agreement #CR812713-01, 102 pp.
129. Potter, P.E., J.B. Maynard, and W.A. Pryor. 1980. Sedimentology of Shale.
Springer-Verlag, New York, 306 pp.
130. Pullan, S.E., J.A. Hunter, R.M. Gagne, and R.L. Good. 1987. Delineation of Bedrock
Topography at Val Gagne, Ontario, Using Seismic Reflection Techniques, in Current
Research, Part A, Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 87-1A, pp. 905-912.
131. Puls, R.W. and R.M. Powell. 1992. Acquisition of Representative Ground Water Quality
Samples for Metals. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Summer, pp. 167-176.
132. Puls, R.W., R.M. Powell, D.A. Clark, and C.J. Paul. 1991. Facilitated Transport of
Inorganic Contaminants in Ground Water: Part II. Colloidal Transport, EPA/600/M-
91/040, 12pp.
133. Puls, R.W., and J.H. Eychaner. 1990. Sampling of Ground Water for Inorganics -
Pumping Rate, Filtration, and Oxidation Effects, in: Fourth National Outdoor Action
Conference on Aquifer Restoration, Ground Water Monitoring, and Geophysical Methods,
NWWA, May 14-17, 1990, pp. 313-327.
134. Puls, R.W., J.H. Eychaner, and R.M. Powell. 1990. Colloidal Facilitated Transport of
Inorganic Contaminants in Ground Water: Part I. Sampling Considerations.
Environmental Research Brief, EPA/600/M-90/023, 12pp.
135. Puls, R.W., and MJ. Barcelona. 1989a. Filtration of Ground Water Samples for Metals
Analysis. Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials, v. 6, No. 4.
136. Puls, R.W., and MJ. Barcelona. 1989b. Ground Water Sampling for Metals Analyses.
USEPA Superfund Ground Water Issue, EPA/504/4-89/001, 6 pp.
137. Purdin, W. 1980. Using Nonmetallic Casing for Geothermal Wells. Water Well Journal,
v. 34, pp. 90-91.
138. Quinlan, J.F. 1990. Special Problems of Ground-Water Monitoring in Karst Terranes,
in D.M. Nielsen and A.I. Johnson, eds., Ground Water and Vadose Zone Monitoring.
ASTM STP 1053, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, pp. 275-304.
Al-12 November 1992
-------
139. Quinlan, J.F. 1989. Ground-Water Monitoring in Karst Terranes: Recommended
Protocols and Implicit Assumptions. USEPA EPA/600/X-89/050, 79 pp.
140. Quinlan, J.F., R.O. Ewers and M.S. Field. 1988. How to Use Ground-Water Tracing to
"Prove" That Leakage of Harmful Materials From a Site in a Karst Terrane Will Not
Occur. Proceedings of the Second Conference on Environmental Problems in Karst
Terranes and Their Solutions, pp. 289-301.
141. Quinlan, J.F. 1987. Qualitative Water Tracing with Dyes in Karst Terranes, in J.F.
Quinlan, ed., Practical Karst Hydrogeology with Emphasis on Ground-Water Monitoring
(Course Manual): National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, v. 6, p. E1-E24.
142. Quinlan, J.F., and E.C. Alexander, Jr. 1987. How Often Should Samples be Taken at
Relevant Locations for Reliable Monitoring of Pollutants from an Agricultural, Waste
Disposal, or Spill Site in a Karst Terrane? A First Approximation, in B.F. Beck and W.L.
Wilson, eds., Proceedings of the 2nd Multidisciplinary Conference on Sinkholes and the
Environmental Impacts of Karst, Orlando, Florida, pp. 277-286.
143. Quinlan, J.F., and R.O. Ewers. 1985. Ground-Water Flow in Limestone Terranes:
Strategy Rationale and Procedure for Reliable, Efficient Monitoring of Ground-Water
Quality in Karst Areas. Proceedings of the National Symposium and Exposition on
Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring (5th, Columbus, Ohio), National Water
Well Association, Worthington, Ohio, pp. 197-234.
144. Rabek, J.F., B. Ranby, and T.A. Skowronski. 1985. Photothermal Dehydrochlorination
of Poly(vinyl chloride). Macromolecules, v. 18, pp. 1810-1818.
145. Renz, M.E. 1989. In situ Decommissioning of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells. Water
Well Journal, May, pp. 58-60.
146. Reynolds, G.W., and R.W. Gillham. 1985. Absorption of Halogenated Organic
Compounds by Polymer Materials Commonly used in Ground-Water Monitoring.
Proceedings of the Second Canadian/American Conference on Hydrogeology, National
Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 125-132.
147. Robin, M.J.L. and R.W. Gillham. 1987. Field Evaluation of Well Purging Procedures.
Ground-Water Monitoring Review, v.7, no.4, pp.85-93.
148. Rogers, R.B., and W.F. Kean. 1980. Monitoring Ground-Water Contamination at a Fly
Ash Disposal Site Using Surface Electrical Resistivity Methods. Ground Water, v. 18,
pp. 472-478.
149. Sangerlat, G. 1972. The Penetrometer and Soil Exploration. Elsevier Publishing,
Amsterdam.
Al-13 November 1992
-------
150. Santa Clara County Water District. 1985. Groundwater Monitoring Guidelines, Santa
Clara County, California, 58 pp.
151. Schlumberger. 1989. Log Interpretation Principles and Applications. Schlumberger
Educational Services, Houston, Texas.
152. Schmertmann, J.H. 1978. Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test Performance and Design.
Federal Highway Administration, FHWA-TS-209, Washington, D.C.
153. Sevee, J. 1991. Methods and Procedures for Defining Aquifer Parameters, in D.M.
Nielsen, ed., Practical Handbook of Ground-Water Monitoring. Lewis Publishers,
Chelsea, MI, pp. 397-447.
154. Shuster, E.T., and W.B. White. 1971. Seasonal Fluctuations in the Chemistry of
Limestone Springs: A Possible Means for Characterizing Carbonate Aquifers. Journal
of Hydrology, v. 14, pp. 93-128.
155. Small, P.A. 1953. Some Factors Affecting the Solubility of Polymers. Jour. Applied
Chemistry, v. 3, pp. 71-80.
156. Sosebee, J.B., P.C. Geiszler, D.L. Winegardner, and C.R. Fisher. 1983. Contamination
of Ground-Water Samples with PVC Adhesives and PVC Primer from Monitoring Wells,
in R.A. Conway and W.P. Gulledge, eds., Proceedings of the ASTM Second Symposium
on Hazardous and Industrial Solid Waste Testing, ASTM STP 805, ASTM, Philadelphia,
pp. 38-50.
157. Stephens, E. 1986. Procedures for Conducting a Comprehensive Ground Water
Monitoring Evaluation of Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities, California Department of
Health Services, 52 pp.
158. Stollar, R., and P. Roux. 1975. Earth Resistivity Surveys - A Method for Defining
Groundwater Contamination. Ground Water, v. 13, pp. 145-150.
159. Sykes, A.L., R.A McAllister, and J.B. Homolya. 1986. "Sorption of Organics by
Monitoring Well Construction Materials." Ground-Water Monitoring Review, v. 6, pp.
49-55.
160. Tai, D.Y., K.S. Turner and L.A. Garcia. 1991. The Use of a Standpipe to Evaluate
Ground Water Samplers. Ground-Water Monitoring Review, Winter, pp. 125-132.
161. Taylor, K., J. Hess, and S. Wheatcraft. 1990. Evaluation of Selected Borehole
Geophysical Methods for Hazardous Waste Site Investigations and Monitoring.
EPA/EMSL-Las Vegas, USEPA Cooperative Agreement CR-812713, EPA/600/4-90/029,
82pp.
Al-14 November 1992
-------
162. Telford, W.M., L.P. Geldart, R.E. Sheriff, and D.A. Keys. 1976. Applied Geophysics.
Cambridge University Press, New York, 860 pp.
163. Thomas, I.E., and PJ. McGlew. 1985. Techniques for Investigating Contaminated
Bedrock Aquifers. Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Management of
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, pp. 142-146.
164. Tomson, M.B., S.R. Hutchins, J.M. King, and C.H. Ward. 1979. Trace Organic
Contamination of Ground Water: Methods for Study and Preliminary Results. Ill World
Congress on Water Resources, Mexico City, Mexico, v. 8, pp. 3709-3710.
165. Urish, D.W. 1983. The Practical Application of Surface Electrical Resistivity to
Detection of Ground-Water Pollution. Ground Water, v. 21, pp. 144-152.
166. USEPA. November 199la. Seminar Publication — Site Characterization for Subsurface
Remediation. EPA/625/4-91/026, 259 pp.
167. USEPA. July 1991b. Handbook - Ground Water, Volume II: Methodology. EPA/625/6-
90/016b, 144 pp.
168. USEPA. September 1990. Handbook - Ground Water, Volume I: Ground Water and
Contamination. EPA/625/6-90/016a, 141 pp.
169. USEPA. 1989a. Statistical Analysis of Ground-Water Monitoring Data at RCRA
Facilities, Interim Final Guidance.
170. USEPA. 1989b. RCRA Sampling Procedures Handbook.
171. USEPA. 1989c. Interim Final. Criteria for Identifying Areas of Vulnerable
Hydrogeology Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Appendix B -
Ground-Water Flow Net/Flow Line Construction and Analysis.
172. USEPA. 1989d. RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) Interim Final Guidance. EPA
530/SW-89-031, OSWER Directive 9502.00-6D.
173. USEPA. 1989e. Ground-Water Research. Research Description. EPA/600/9-89/088,11
pp.
174. USEPA. 1988. Application of Dye Tracing Techniques for Determining Solution
Transport Characteristics of Ground Water in Karst Terranes, USEPA Region IV, Atlanta,
GA. EPA 904/6-88-001, 103 pp.
175. USEPA. 1987a. A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods.
EPA/540/P-87/001.
Al-15 November 1992
-------
176. USEPA. 1987b. Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response Activities,
Development Process. EPA 840/G-87/003.
177. USEPA. 1986a. RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring Technical Enforcement Document.
OSWER-9950.1.
178. USEPA. 1986b. Permit Guidance Manual on Unsaturated Zone Monitoring for
Hazardous Waste Land Treatment Units. EPA 530-SW-86-040.
179. USEPA. 1983. Draft RCRA Permit Writer's Manual, Ground-Water Protection, 40 CFR
Part 264, Subpart F, 263 pp.
180. USEPA. 1975. Manual of Water Well Construction Practices. USEPA Office of Water
Supply, Report No. EPA-570/9-75-001, 156 pp.
181. van Ee, J.J., and L.G. McMillion. 1988. "Quality Assurance Guidelines for
Ground-Water Investigation: The Requirements", in A.G. Collins and A.I. Johnson, eds.
Ground-Water Contamination: Field Methods, ASTM STP 963. ASTM, Philadelphia, pp.
27-34.
182. VanDam, J. 1976. Possibilities and Limitations of the Resistivity Method of
Geoelectrical Prospecting in the Solution of Geohydrological Problems. Geoexploration,
v. 14, pp. 79-193.
183. Van Nostrand, R.G., and K.L. Cook. 1966. Interpretation of Resistivity Data. U.S.
Geological Survey Professional Paper 499, U.S.G.P.O., Washington, D.C.
184. Walker, W.H. 1974. Tube Wells, Open Wells, and Optimum Ground-Water Resource
Development. Ground Water, v. 12, No.l, pp. 10-15.
185. Waste Management, Inc. 1989. Site Assessment Manual.
186. Way, S.C., and C.R. McKee. 1982. In-Situ Determination of Three-Dimensional Aquifer
Permeabilities. Ground Water, v. 20, No. 5, pp. 594-603.
187. West, C.C. 1990. Transport of Macromolecules and Humate Colloids through a Sand
and a Clay Amended Sand Laboratory Column. EPA Project Summary, EPA/600/S2-
90/020, 7 pp.
188. Williams, E.B. 1981. Fundamental Concepts of Well Design. Ground Water, v. 19, No.
5, pp. 527-542.
189. Wilson, L.G. 1980. Monitoring in the Vadose Zone: A Review of Technical Elements
and Methods. EPA/EMSL-Las Vegas, EPA 600/7-80-134, 168 pp.
Al-16 November 1992
-------
190. Yeskis, D., K. Chiu, S. Meyers, J. Weiss, and T. Bloom. 1988. A Field Study of
Various Sampling Devices and Their Effects on Volatile Organic Contaminants. Second
National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer Restoration, Ground-Water Monitoring
and Geophysical Methods, NWWA, May 23-26, 1988, pp. 471-479.
191. Zohdy, A.A.R., G.P. Eaton, and D.R. Mabey. 1974. Application of Surface Geophysics
to Ground-Water Investigations, Chapter Dl, Electrical Methods, in Techniques of Water
Resource Investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey, 116 pp.
Al-17 November 1992
-------
APPENDIX 2
EXAMPLES OF CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES FOR
IDENTIFICATION OF ROCK SAMPLES
November 1992
-------
Percentage
clay-tua
conautuenis
Adjective
i
o
Ui
a
cc
•*•
I
I
!
1
5 E
38
0
]]
e ***
s*
1 LC
a HK
IW
f
1H
0-32
Gritty
BEDDED
SILT
LAMINATED
SILT
BEDDED
SILTSTONE
LAMINATED
SILTSTONE
QUARTZ
ARQILUTt
QUARTZ
SLATE
33-iS
Loamy
BEDDED
MUD
LAMINATED
MUD
MUOSTONE
MUDSHALE
86-100
Fat or Slick
BEDDED
CLAYMUD
LAMINATED
CLAYMUD
CLAYSTONE
CLAYSHALE
ARGILUTE
SLATE
PHYLUTE AND/OR MICA SCHIST
CLASSIFICATION OF SHALE (MORE THAN 50% GRAINS LESS THAN 0.062MM).
SOURCE: POTTER ET AL, 1980.
November 1992
A2-1
-------
CLASSIFICATION OF IGNEOUS ROCKS
MINERAL COMPOSITION
too
SOURCE: HAMBUN AND HOWARD (1975)
November 1992
A2-2
-------
DepoMioaai Texture recognizable
Ongiiul components not bound together
during depositions
Conuimmud
(particles of day aad line silt size)
Mud-supported
Lea than
I0*/t grains
Mudttone
More than
10% grains
Wackstone
Grain-
supported
Packatone
Ucksmud
and is train'
supported
Cranstone
Original components
were bound together
during deposition. ..at
shown by istefgrowfl
ikdetal matter, uuni-
nation contrary to
(laviti, or svdiHM8t«
floored camiee that
*mm t n i Arf f^^ ^H
•re rooNDovvr oy
orguK or qoaatiOBV
and an too large to
Depoaitioaat texture
Crystalline carbonate
(SubdMdeaeeordiBg
uMiflBCO to OlaV OQ
physical texture or
CLASSIFICATION OF CARBONATE ROCKS ACCORDING TO DEPOSIT1ONAL
TEXTURE
CLASSIFICATION OF TERRIGENOUS SANDSTONES
(MODIRED FROM DOTT, 1964, FIG. 3)
November 1992
A2-3
-------
APPENDIX 3
CHEMICAL RESISTANCE CHART SHOWING THE CHEMICAL EFFECT OF
MANY CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS ON PVC, PTFE, AND STAINLESS STEEL
(MODIFIED FROM THE 1991-1992 CATALOG OF THE
COLE-PARMER INSTRUMENT COMPANY)
November 1992
xi
-------
Chemical resistance chart
Ratings-chemical tttect
A-Norikct-EnlM.
B-Minor rikct-Good.
C-Modmte (tat-Far
D-SMrorihct-Not
Explanation of footnotes
1 SabsUOwytoTrF. 3. SatBtattry tor Orings.
2. Sa«ac»ytol2
A A
- A
-4—A.
A A
A A
A A'
C' -
0 •
B' 0
- A
A A
B' A
B A>
A>
A>
A'
- A
A A
- A
AA
A A
A A
• A
A A
A A
A A
A A
B> A
A
A'
JL
B A
A A
D
A'
C'
A>
_AL_A_
75-7-
D 0
D 0
C -
JL
B A
_A A
A' B
C C
C' C
A -
V C
B A
A' A
A A'
C< A
A
A A
A> A
A> A
III
i i i
iih
B 8
B' B'
A1 B
A1 -
v r
B
B
B1
B P
* * *
C-
D
B> 8 A
ODD
A A C
A C - A
A A A 0
A B B 8
B> B> C' 8
- C
0 0
B C C A
B C D B1
A A - A
B B 8 A
8 B B B
A A D
A A B
A A B
A A B
A A A A
B B B D
A A A -
C 0 0 -
A - - B
C C' 0 C
8 C' C A
C C 0 C
A 0 A D
A B1 A 0
B> D 0 D
* B B' A
B< C
B' B' C B
B> C> D 8
*' * C» A
A A
A A
D 0
- 8
B A
A3-1
November 1992
-------
Chemical resistance chart
Ratings-diemlcfi iffect
A-NoeHact-EailM.
B- Minor Met -Good.
C-Moderate dtW-F
0-SMnHkct-Nat
Explanation of footnotes
1. SafetaawytoTTF 3. Satisfactory tor 0«infls.
2.
FaitS
Add
FfllHtlMj
11
Fmiz
FmQ
fmotir
IE
D -
D -
0 -
C' C
D 0
A
A
A
A
A1'
ill
i i i
iih
D D
* -
A'
A'
A> A
A A
-SLJL
A" C
S -
C C
A
0
A' D
A •
0 D
Hf -
e D_
e o
A1 A<
A' A<
P P
A I
C1 D
A1 8'
A' I
? 0
I V
c r
c c
r -c
A1 A<
A C
A C
- 0
A A
A A1
A> A1
A A>
A A
A A
A A
A
A
A A
r r r c
lira
A -
B C
0 D
A C
I A
- C
I D
D A
r A
B A
0 -
B A
. AL
C A'
C A>
A
A
HydmcMoricAeld37%
HydncMMcAdd 100*
H>*oiBlrtcAdd50%
HydnltticAcfd 7S%
H|MlHrteAtidiOO«
A3-2
November 1992
-------
Chemical resistance chart
Ratings-chemical ttttet
A-Noelkct-E«ctlM.
B-Mmtfdfct-Good.
C-Moderate etea-Fa.
D-SMraetet-Not
Explanation of footnotes
1. SafchdniyloTrF 3. Safebctoy lor O-trop.
2.
MM* W* MOM
ttM)ICMOMM
MM* MM*
MM* Blytlttm Pratt
MriM ttoMyt MOM
MM* bom* MM
I Add (£1% Add)
DM M (20,30,40. SO)
OM2H
OHM 100%
(MCMdtODH)
nmmcAddAMjiW*
PlaptoCAddnndi)
0 -
A A
A A
A -
C» A
D D
D -
D A
- A
o -
- A
0 D
A 0
D --
C 0
D D
V A
- A
C A
A A
- A
A A
A A
- A
- A
• A
- A
A A
A A
A A
- A
- A
0 A
A' A
A A
- A
B A
A1 - A A
A - A A
B - A A
A' - A A
C* D A A
- C' A
A tf A'
• A A
• A A
A
C1 -
B -
C' -
C1 D
A A
A A
A C
V B
B» C
A1 A
- 0 -
C A A
D P .
A B -
0 - A
0 A *
A A
II I
i i I
Hie
A - B A
A A C B
A A C C
- - A 0
A A B A
A A - B
A A - C
- - A D
A - A A1'
B B 8 D
A A A 0
A - - A
C 0 0 A
B1 B B A
C C - -
C C D -
A C
D C
A A
B B
A A B B
A' A B 0
A< A CD
A A
B B
A B
A A A B
B B I 0
A A A 0
A A A 0
A A A 0
A B A A
A A - 0
A A A 0
B V if 0
B 8» *» 0
B' B I A
A A A 0
c e « a
• - B
§» A 0
• A A
A A' B
If V t
DOB
• A -
A C C B
A A A A
B B B1 B
RjgttrtalMIOgT
nuMaMMK*F
FtattdlBtfiiaOT
MBHllSOT
120T
II
A A
A A
A A
A A
C A
C A
C A
C A
B A
A -A
_A A
B A
A A
A A
A A
* *
B A>
ill
i i i
ilii
A A
A -
A C A
A B -
C - 0
C - 0
D - 0
C - P
0 -
0 A
0
c
c
A
* *
B
8 C
B< B
B1 B
!!_*'-
B' B'
A3-3
November 1992
-------
Chemical resistance chart
Ratiogs-chemlul sffoct
B - Miner elkd-Good.
C-Moderate «tW-F».
D-Sewn effect-Not
Explaiution of footnotes
1 SafefcctoytoTTF 3 Satisfactory lor Ckings
2. SafchflorytoiarF.
HjMtt (Carte POM)
iii
A
A
B -
A1 C
A -
A A
A A
A A
A A
A A
A'
A>
A>
A1
C1
C A A
- A A
- - A
D - C» A'
A - B A
C1 -- - -
A' - A A
- A
A>
A>
A*
A>
A'
C A
B A
-. A
C A
- A
A' B A
A> - A
A - -
A* - A
C - -
A C -
A C A
A C -
A A
A»
II
i i
Hi!
r B<
8 B<
BB
B 8'
A
V
A'
A
A C
A A
A A
A B
AD
B r
A A
r B
C D
i' r r
A t
D D
B1
r
B A
A D
B< D D A
B1 r C A
B> C A A
A B B1 A
r B1 8 A
C B C A
B1 B B -
A' r A' A
D D C1 A
A B> A> A
DOB
A -
ABA
A A A
A
B 8 A
B B A
r D A
SOMRlNDHtMKkffO)
StfurCMoMi
StfurTradftKOry)
StfMcAtU<<10%)
MMcAdd(10-7S%)
SriMcAtU(7S-109K)
suMtAeaiHacnci
SIMM AtH (COM cone)
ToM«(ToM)
TMtamofcAttt
A'
A>
A>
A>
A'
B>
C'
0
C1
A'
A>
A
A
'A
A'
D A
- A
D
A1
- C1
B A
B A
- A
- C
D
B
C
D 0 A<
- D -
D
A'
A
A
D
A>
A>
A - -
D D A
A> - A
II
11
ill!
8 A
A> A
A' B
0 D
A -
C' A
C -
C A
D B
A1 V
A B
A A
A A
B B_
- 0
- D
AA
D D
A1 D
A D
0 0
0 A
0 A
A
- B
A 0
A 0
D D
D C
C D
D B
D B
OB
OB
B C
8 B'
C B
B' B
A B' B' A
A' A» . B
C» C' C'
A B -
A
A A -
D -
'
A A D
9 D B
B - D
V B D
A -
A D
C A
C A
A D
9 D A
A - A
B' C1 A
A3-4
November 1992
-------
APPENDIX 4
SOURCES OF HYDROGEOLOGICAL INFORMATION
-------
INFORMATION SOURCES (modified from Waste Management, Inc., 1989)
GENERAL DATA SOURCES
Libraries
Computer literature
searches
Dialog
Subscriptions and
information:
1-800-3-DIALOG.
Master Directory
(MD)
User Support Office
Suite 300
Hughes STX Corp.
7601 OraGlen Drive
Greenbelt, MD 20771
(301) 513-1687
Span: BLAND NSSDCA.
GSFC.NASA.GOV
THIEMAN.NSSDCA.
GSFC.NASA.GOV
Information
Obtainable
Earth science
bibliographic indices
Bibliographic indices
Accesses over 425 data
bases from a broad scope
of disciplines including
such data bases as GEOREF
and GEOARCHIVE.
The MD is a multidis-
ciplinary data base that
covers earth science
(geology, oceanography,
atmospheric science),
space physics, solar
physics, planetary
science, and astronomy/
astrophysics. It
describes data generated
by NASA, NOAA, USGS, DOE,
EPA, and other agencies
and universities, as well
as international data
bases.
Many of the types of information discussed
below can be obtained from libraries.
Excellent library facilities are available
at the U.S. Geological Survey offices (USGS)
in Reston, VA; Denver, CO; and Menlo Park,
CA. Local university libraries can contain
good collections of earth science and
related information and typically are
repositories for Federal documents. In
addition, local public libraries normally
have information on the physical and
historical characteristics of the
surrounding area.
Perhaps one of the most useful and cost
effective developments in the bibliographic
indexes has been the increased availability
of computerized reference searches. On-line
computer searches save significant time and
money by giving rapid retrieval of citations
of all listed articles on a given subj ect
and eliminate manual searching of annual
cumulated indexes. A search is done by use
of keywords, author names, or title words,
and can be delimited by ranges of dates or a
given number of the most recent or oldest
references. The average search requires
about 15 minutes of online searching and
costs about $50 for computer time and
offline printing of citations and abstracts.
Provides indexes to book reviews and
biographes; directories of companies,
people, and associations; and access to the
complete text of articles from many
newspapers, journals, and other original
sources.
MD is a free on-line data information
service. Data available include personnel
contact information, access procedures to
other data bases, scientific campaigns or
proj ects, and other data sources.
Access Procedures: MD resides on a VAX at
NSSDC and may be reached by several
networks. MD is option #1 on the menu of
NSSDC's On-line Data Information Services
(NODIS) account. From span nodes: SET HOST
NSSDA. USERNAME:NSSDC (no password). From
Internet: TELNET NSSDCA.GSFC.NASA.GOV or
TELNET 128.183.36.23.
Via Direct Dial: Set modem to 8 bits, no
parity, 1 stop bit, 300,1200 (preferable),
or 2400 baud. Dial (301) 286-9000 ENTER
NUMBER: MD, CALL COMPLETE: [CR], USERNAME:
NSSDC (no password). For assistance or more
information, contact the MD User Support
Office (301) 513-1687.
A4-1
November 1992
-------
Source
Alternative
Treatment
Technology
Information Center
(ATTIC)
4 Research Place
Suite 210
Rockville, MD 20850
(301) 670-6294
(voice)
(301) 670-3808
(on-line)
Earth Science
Data Directory
(ESDD)
U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS)
801 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-7112
Local, State,
Federal, and
Regional Agencies
University sources
Information
Obtainable
The ATTIC system is a
collection of hazardous
waste databases that are
accessed through a
computerized bulletin
board system (BBS). The
BBS features news items,
bulletins, and special
interest conferences.
ATTIC users can access
several databases
including the ATTIC
Database, which contains
over 2,500 records dealing
with alternative and
innovative technologies
for hazardous waste
treatment; and the RREL
Treatability Database,
which provides data on
characteristics and
treatability of a wide
variety of contaminants.
Information from these
sources consists of
treatability information,
case histories, transport
and fate data, and other
technical information.
Also included are the
abstracts of Superfund
Innovative Technology
Evaluat ion (SITE) report s,
many Records of Decisions
(RODs), State agency
reports, international
programs, and industry
studies.
ESDD is a data base that
contains information
related to the geologic,
hydrologic, cartographic,
and biological sciences.
Site specific assessment
data for dams, harbors,
river basin impoundments,
and Federal highways,
soils, land use, flood
plains, groundwater,
aerial photographs, well
records, geophysical
borehole logs
Engineering and geology
theses
Comments
ATTIC is free of charge to all members of
the federal, state and private sectors
involved in site remediation. ATTIC can be
accessed directly by a modem. Abstracts of
reports can be downloaded from the system.
Copies of complete reports are available on
request. (Users register online the first
time they access ATTIC.) A User's Manual is
available and may be obtained by calling the
ATTIC System Operator or leaving a message
on the bulletin board.
Also included are data bases that reference
geographic, sociologic, economic, and
demographic information. Information comes
from worldwide data sources and data
includes that from NOAA, NSF, NASA, and EPA.
Many states maintain a department of the
environment or natural resources. Reports
can be obtained by contacting the
responsible agency. Surface water and
geological foundation conditions such as
fracture orientation, permeability,
faulting, rippability, and weathered
profiles are particularly well covered in
these investigations.
College and university geology theses, in
most instances, are well-documented studies
dealing with specific areas, generally
prepared under the guidance of faculty
members having expertise in the subj ect
under investigation. Most theses are not
published.
A4-2
November 1992
-------
Comprehensive
dissertation index
Information
Obtainable
Doctoral dissertations
AGI Directory of
Geoscience
Department
DATRIX II University
Microfilms
International
300 North Zeeb Rd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
(800) 521-3042
ext. 732
(313) 761-4700
(in Alaska, Hawaii,
and Michigan)
United States
Geology: A
Dissertation
Bibliography by
State
Dissertation
Abstracts'
International,
Volume B - Science
and Engineering, a"
monthly publication
of University
Microfilm
International
Faculty Members
Dissertations and Masters
theses
Ph . D . dissertation or
Masters theses
Extended abstracts of
dissertations from more
than 400 U.S. and Canadian
universities
Citations began in 1861 and include almost
every doctoral dissertation accepted in
North America thereafter. The index is
available at larger library reference desks
and is organized into 32 subj ect volumes and
5 author volumes. Specific titles are
located through title keywords or author
names. Ph.D. dissertations from all U.S.
universities are included.
Regular updates of faculty, specialties, and
telephone date.
Using title keywords, a bibliography of
relevant theses can be compiled and mailed
to the user within two weeks. In addition,
the DATRIX Alert system can automatically
provide new bibliographic citations as they
become available.
Free index from University Microfilms
International. Some universities do not
submit dissertations to University
Microfilms for reproduction or abstracting,
however, and the dissertations from these
schools do not appear in the United States
Geology index. Citations for dissertations
not abstracted must be located through
DATRIX II or Comprehensive Dissertation
Index.
Once the citation for a specific
dissertation has been obtained from the
Comprehensive Dissertation Index or from
DATRIX II, the abstract can be scanned to
determine whether it is relevant to the
proj ect at hand. Since some universities do
not participate, some theses indexed in the
two sources listed above must be obtained
directly from the author or the university
at which the research was completed.
Abstracts of Masters theses available from
University Microfilms are summarized in 150-
word abstracts in Masters Abstracts and are
indexed by author and title keywords.
Both Dissertation Abstracts International
and Masters Abstracts are available at many
university libraries.
A hard (paper) or microform (microfilm or
microfiche) copy of any dissertation or
thesis abstracted can be purchased from
University Microfilms.
A4-3
November 1992
-------
Source
USGS Publication
Manuscripts System
(PUBMANUS)
Earth Science
Information Center
507 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-6045
U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS)
Earth Science
Information Center
(ESIC)
Reston, VA
(703) 648-6045
1-800-USA-MAPS
Electric Power
Research Institute
(EPRI)
ATTN: EPRI
Technical
Information
Specialists
3412 Hillview Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94304
(415) 855-2411
(510) 934-4212
(distribution
center)
RCRA/Superfund
Hotline
Office of Solid
Waste (OS-305)
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
(800) 424-9346
(toll free)
(Washington, DC
metropolitan area)
(703) 920-9810
Information
Obtainable
This data base provides
referral to all U.S.
Geological Survey
publications.
Detailed topographic,
geologic, and hydrologic
information is available
from the USGS through the
Earth Science Information
Center.
United States historical,
physical divisions,
Federal-aid highways,
national atlas and
scientific maps.
Up-to-date compilation of
research relevant to
utilities.
Information on RCRA,
CERCLA, SARA, and UST
statutes and corresponding
regulations. Also
provides document
distribution service,
including relevant Federal
Register notices.
Comments
Flexible searching techniques enable users
to find information in numerous ways.
Currently, search requests are accepted
through the USGS Earth Science Publication
Office at no charge. (800) USA-MAPS. The
"Guide to Obtaining USGS Information"
(circular 900) is also an excellent source.
It describes the services provided by USGS
information offices. Includes addresses and
telephone numbers, and lists types of
publications and information products and
their sources. Publication is free and may
be ordered from USGS Book and Report Sales.
This guide can be obtained from USGS, Book
and Report Sales, Box 25286, Denver, CO
80225, (303) 236-7477.
ESIC can be contacted to determine which map
best meets your needs. Maps can be
purchased from:
USGS Map Sales
Box 25286
Denver, CO 80225
(303) 236-7477
The EPRI manages a research and development
program on behalf of the U.S. electric power
industry. Its mission is to apply advanced
science and technology to the benefits of
its members and their customers.
Team of information specialists maintains
up-to-date information on the various
regulations and rulemakings in progress.
Hours of operation 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m.
(EST) Monday through Friday. Answer
questions from wide range of callers -
consultants, attorneys, generators,
transporters, facility owner/operators,
State and Federal regulatory agencies, trade
associations, and the general public.
A4-4
November 1992
-------
TOPOGRAPHIC DATA
Source
Branch of
Distribution
U.S. Geological
Survey
Maps Sales
Box 25286, Federal
Center
Denver, CO 80225
(303) 236-7477
Commercial map
supply houses
Topographic Database
National Geophysical
Data at NOAA
Code E/GCI
325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80303
(303) 497-6764
U.S. Geological
Survey Topographic
Map Names Database
Attn. of Chief:GNIS
USGS
523 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-4544
U.S. Geodata Tapes
Dept. of the
Interior
Room 2650
18th & C Sts., NW
Washington, DC 20240
(202) 208-4047
Information
Obtainable
Index and quadrangle maps
for the eastern U.S. and
for states west of the
Mississippi River,
including Alaska, Hawaii,
and Louisiana. Other
scales are available.
Topographic and geologic
maps.
A variety of topography
and terrain data sets
available for use in
geoscience applications.
This database contains
descriptive information
and official names for
approximately 55,000
topographical maps
prepared by the USGS,
including out-of-print
maps. Data includes the
names of topographic maps,
along with SE coordinates
of the states in which
they are located.
These computer tapes
contain cartographic data
in digital form. They are
available in two forms.
The graphic form can be
used to generate computer-
plotted maps. The
topologically-structured
form is suitable for input
to geographic information
system for use in spatial
analysis and geographic
studies.
Comments
A map should be ordered by name, series, and
state. Mapping of an area is commonly
available at two different scales. The
quadrangle name is, in some instances, the
same for both maps; where this occurs, it is
especially important that the requestor
specify the series designation, such as 7.5
minute (1:24,000), 15 minute (1:62,500), or
two-degree (1:250,000).
Commercial map supply houses often have full
state topographic inventories that may be
out of print through national distribution
centers.
The data were attained from U.S. government
agencies, academic institutions, and private
industries.
Printouts and searches are available on a
cost recovery basis.
Tapes are available for the entire US,
including Alaska, and Hawaii, and are sold
in 4 thematic layers: boundaries,
transportation, hydrography and US Public
Land Survey System. Each of the four layers
can be purchased individually. US Geodata
tapes can be ordered through Earth Science
Information (ESIC) Center, as well as
through the following ESIC offices.
Anchorage, AK - (907) 786-7011; Denver, CO -
(303) 236-7477 and 7476; Menlo Park, CA -
(415) 329-4309; Reston, VA - (703) 860-6045;
Rolla, MO - (314) 341-0851; Salt Lake City,
UT - (801) 524-5652; Spokane, WA - (509)
456-2524; and Stennis Space Center, MS -
(601) 688-3541 or (601) 353-2524.
A4-5
November 1992
-------
Source
Geographic
Information
Retrieval and
Analysis System
(GIRAS)
USGS
Earth Science
Information Center
(ESIC)
507 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(800) USA-Maps
(703) 648-6045
Topographic Maps
Users Service
Geographic Names
Information System
(GNIS)
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-7112
Topography Data
National Geophysical
Data Center
NCAA, Code E/GCI
325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80303
(303) 497-6764
Information
Obtainable
Land use maps, land cover
maps, and associated
overlays for the United
States.
Organized and summarized
information about cultural
or physical geographic
entities.
This system contains a
variety of topography and
terrain data sets
available for use in
geoscience applications.
Comments
These maps have been digitized, edited and
incorporated into a digital data base. The
data is available to the public in both
graphic and digital form. Statistics
derived from the data are available also.
Users are able to search for either
locations or attributes. To obtain
information from this data base, contact
ESIC.
GNIS provides a rapid means of organizing
and summarizing current information about
cultural or physical geographic name
entities. The data base contains a separate
file for each state, the District of
Columbia, and territories containing all
7.5-min. maps published or planned.
The data were obtained from U.S. Government
agencies, academic institutions, and private
industries. Data coverage is regional to
worldwide; data collection methods encompass
map digitization to satellite remote
sensing.
A4-6
November 1992
-------
GEOLOGIC DATA
Source
Geological Reference
Sources: A Subject
and Regional
Bibliography of
Publications and
Maps in the
Geological Sciences,
Ward and others
(1981)
A Guide to
Information Sources
in Mining, Minerals,
and Qeosciences,
Kaplan(1965)
Bibliography and
Index of Geology
KWIC (Keyword-in-
Content s) Index of
Rock Mechanics
Literature
Information
Obtainable
Bibliographies of geologic
information for each State
in the U.S. and references
general maps and
groundwater information
for many sites.
Describes more than 1,000
organizations in 142
countries. Its listings
include name, address,
te1ephone number, cable
address, purpose and
function, year organized,
organizational structure,
membership categories, and
publication format.
Federal and State agencies
are listed for the U.S. as
well as private scientific
organizations, institutes,
and associations.
Includes worldwide
references and contains
listings by author and
subj ect.
Engineering geologic and
geotechnical references.
Comments
Provides a useful starting place for many
site assessments. A general section
outlines various bibliographic and
abstracting services, indexes and catalogs,
and other sources of geologic references.
An older useful guide. Part II lists more
than 600 worldwide publications and
periodicals including indexing and
abstracting services, bibliographies,
dictionaries, handbooks, j ournals, source
directories, and yearbooks in most fields of
geosciences.
This publication is issued monthly and
cumulated annually by the American
Geological Institute (AGI), and replaces
separate indexes published by the U.S.
Geological Survey through 1970 (North
American references only) and the Geological
Society of America until 1969 (references
exclusive of North America only). Both
publications merged in 1970 and were
published by the Geological Society of
America through 1978, when AGI continued its
publication.
The KWIC index is available in two volumes
at many earth science libraries (Hoek, 1969;
Jenkins and Brown, 1979).
QEODEX Retrieval
System with Matching
Qeotechnical
Abstracts'
GEODEX
International,
Inc.
P.O. Box 279
Sonoma, CA 95476
Engineering geological and
geotechnical references.
The GEODEX is a hierarchically organized
system providing easy access to the
geotechnical literature and can be used at
many university libraries. The GEODEX
system can be purchased on a subscription
basis.
A4-7
November 1992
-------
Source
U.S. Geological
Survey
Branch of
Distribution
604 S. Pickett St.
Alexandria, VA 22304
U.S. Geological
Survey Library
Database
USGS Main Library
National Center
MS 950
12201 Sunrise Valley
Drive
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-4302
Geologic Names of
the United States
(GEONAMES)
Geologic Division
USGS
907 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
USDA
Soil Conservation
Service
(202) 720-1820
Information
Obtainable
The U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) produces annually a
large volume of
information in many
formats, including maps,
reports, circulars, open-
file reports, professional
papers, bulletins, and
many others.
The Reston library
contains more than 800,000
monographs, serials, maps,
and microforms covering
chemistry, environmental
studies, geology,
geothermal energy,
mineralogy, oceanography,
paleontology, physics,
planetary geology, remote
sensing, soil science,
cartography, water
resources, and zoology.
GEONAMES is an annotated
index of the formal
nomenclature of geologic
units of the United
States. Data includes
distribution, geologic
age, USGS usage,
lithology, thickness, type
locality, and references.
Soil maps and description
are available for about
75% of the country through
the U.S. Soil Conservation
Service office located in
each state capital.
Comments
To simplify the dissemination of this
information, the USGS has issued a Circular
(No. 777) entitled A Guide to Obtaining
Information from the USQS (Clarke, et al.,
1981).
This library system is one of the largest
earth science libraries in the world.
Library staff and users may access the
online catalog from terminals at each of the
4 USGS libraries. The data base can be
searched by author, title, key words,
subj ects, call numbers, and corporate/
conference names. The general public is
welcome to conduct literature searches using
various data bases. Regional libraries are
located in Denver, CO; Flagstaff, AZ; and
Menlo Park, CA.
Printouts are not available. Diskettes
containing data for 2 or more adj acent
states are available from USGS Open-File and
Publications, Box 25425 Federal Center,
Denver, CO 80225. Magnetic tapes can be
obtained from NTIS.
A4-8
November 1992
-------
GEOPHYSICAL DATA
Source
U.S. Geological
Survey Water Supply
Papers
Information
Obtainable
The most common types of
geophysical data are
available from seismic and
resistivity surveys.
Well Log Libraries
Electric Log
Services
P.O. Box 3150
Midland, TX 79702
Tel: (915) 682-7773
Geophysical Survey
Firms
Electric logs for many
petroleum wells can be
obtained from one of
several well log libraries
in the U.S.
Specific geophysical logs
NOAA
National Geophysical
Data Center (NGDC)
Chief, Solid Earth
Geophysics
325 Broadway
Boulder, CO 80303
(303) 497-6521
Fax (303) 497-6513
NGDC maintains a computer
database which contains
information on earthquake
occurrences from
prehistoric times to the
present. Historic U.S.
earthquakes are included
for the period starting in
1638. NGCD also maintains
databases on other
parameters, such as
topography, magnetics,
gravity, and other topics.
Comments
Water Supply Papers for an area can be
located by any of the computer searches or
published indexes described in the first
section of this paper. In addition, the
USGS also publishes geophysical maps of
various types at relatively small scales for
many areas of the U.S. Aeromagnetic maps
have been completed for much of the U.S.,
although the flight altitude of several
thousand meters and scale of 1:24,000 make
these maps too general for most site
specific work.
The geophysical logs are indexed by survey
section. To obtain information on wells in
a given area, it is necessary to compile a
list of the townships, ranges, and section
numbers covering the area.
Proprietary geophysical data can sometimes
be obtained from private survey firms. In
general, the original client must approve
the exchange of information, and preference
is given for academic purposes. If the
information cannot be released, firms may be
willing to provide references to published
information they obtained before the survey,
or information published as a result of the
survey.
Site studies for many projects now require
information regarding the seismicity of the
region surrounding the site. The National
Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) is a focal point for
dissemination of earthquake data and
information for both technical and general
users, except for information on recent
earthquakes. (Information about recent
earthquakes can be obtained by contacting
the USGS.)
For a fee, a search can be made for one of
the following parameters:
Geographic area (circular or rectangular
area)
- Time period (staring 1638 for U.S.)
Magnitude range
- Date
- Time
- Depth
Intensity (Modified Mercalli)
A4-9
November 1992
-------
Source
Geomagnet i sm
(GEOMAG)
Branch of Global
Seismology and
Geomagnet i sm
USGS
Box 25046
Federal Center
Mail Stop 968
Denver, CO 80225
(303) 273-8440 or
(303) 273-8441
Information
Obtainable
GEOMAG contains current
and historical magnetic-
declination information
for the United States. I
provides historical and
current values of
declination.
Comments
Current or historical values back to 1945
can be obtained over the telephone at no
charge by calling (800) 358-2663. To access
the full program via modem, contact the
listed office for hook-up instructions.
There is no subscription fee.
A4-10
November 1992
-------
REMOTE SENSING
Source
USGS Earth Resources
Observation Systems
(EROS) Data Center
User Service
EROS Data Center
U.S. Geological
Survey
Sioux Falls, SD
57198
(605) 594-6151
Landsat Data
NASA Aerial
Photography
Aerial Mapping
Photography
Information
Obtainable
The EROS Program provides
remotely-sensed data. To
obtain publications,
request further
information, or place an
order, contact the EROS
Data Center.
Landsat satellites sensor
images are found in
spectral bands:
- Band 4 (emphasizes
sediment -laden and
shallow water)
- Band 5 (emphasizes
cultural features)
- Band 6 (emphasizes
vegetation, land/water
boundaries, and
landforms)
- Band 7 (as above, with
best penetration of
haze)
- Band 5 gives the best
general-purpose view of
the earth's surface.
Black and white images
and false-color
composites are
available.
Photography is available
in a wide variety of
formats from flight at
altitudes ranging from one
to 18 km. Photographs
generally come as 230 mm
by 230 mm prints at scales
of 1:60,000 or 1:120,000,
and are available as black
and white, color, or
false-color infrared
prints.
Aerial photography
coverage obtained by the
USGS and other Federal
agencies (other than the
Soil Conservation Service)
for mapping of the U.S. is
available as 230 mm by 230
mm black and white prints
which are taken at
altitudes of 600 m to 12
km. Scales range from
1:20,000 to 1:60,000.
Comments
The EROS Data Center, near Sioux Falls,
South Dakota, is operated by the USGS to
provide access primarily to NASA's Landsat
imagery, aerial photography acquired by the
U.S. Department of the Interior, and
photography and multi-spectral imagery
acquired by NASA from several satellite data
systems sources. The primary functions of
the Data Center are data storage and
reproduction, user assistance, and training.
The Landsat satellites were designed to
orbit the earth about 14 times each day at
an altitude of 920 km, obtaining repetitive
coverage every 18 days. The primary sensor
aboard the satellites is a multi-spectral
scanner that acquires parallelogram images
185 km per side in four spectral bands.
NASA aerial photography is directed at
testing a variety of remote-sensing
instruments and techniques in aerial flights
over certain preselected test sites over the
continental U.S.
Because of the large number of individual
photographs needed to show a region on the
ground, photomosaic indexes are used to
identify photographic coverage of a specific
area. The Data Center has more than 50,000
such mosaics available for photographic
selection.
A4-11
November 1992
-------
Source
Aerial Photography
Field Office
U.S. Department of
Agriculture
P.O. Box 30010
Salt Lake City, UT
84130
(801) 975-3503
Photogrammetry
Division of NOAA
National Oceanic
and Atmospheric
Administration
6001 Executive Blvd.
Rockville, MD 20852
(301) 443-8601
FTS 443-8601
U.S. Bureau of Land
Management
Aerial Photo Section
Slyia Gorski
(SC-67-C)
P.O. Box 25047
Building 46
Denver, CO 80225-
0047
(303) 236-7991
National Archives
and Records Admin.
Cartographic and
Architectural
Branch
8 Pennsylvania Ave.,
N.W.
Washington, DC 20408
(703) 756-6700
National Air
Photograph Library
615 Booth St.
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OE9
Canada
(613) 995-4560
Fax (613) 995-4568
Canada Center for
Remote Sensing
588 Booth Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OW7
Canada
(613) 990-8033
Commercial Aerial
Photo Firms
American Society for
Photogrammetry and
Remote Sensing
5410 Grosvenor Lane
Suite 210
Bethesda, MD 20814
(301) 493-0290
Information
Obtainable
Conventional aerial
photography scales of
1:20,000 to 1:40,000.
The Coastal Mapping
Division of NOAA maintains
a file of color and black
and white photographs of
the tidal zone of the
At1ant i c, Gulf, and
Pacific coasts. The
scales of the photographs
range from 1:20,000 to
1:60,000.
The Bureau of Land
Management has aerial
photographic coverage of
over 50 percent of its
lands in 11 western
states.
Airphoto coverage from the
late 1930's to the 1940's
obtained for portions of
the U.S.
Also, foreign airphoto
coverage for the World War
II period is available.
Comments
Aerial photographs by the various agencies
of the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
Service [ASCS], Soil Conservation Service
[SCS], and Forest Service [USFS]) cover much
of the U.S.
An index for the collection can be obtained
by contacting the Coastal Mapping Division
at (301) 443-8601 or the address listed.
For an index of the entire collection
contact the U.S. Bureau of Land Management
at (303) 236-7991 or the address listed.
This service may be important for early
documentation of site activities.
Canadian airphoto coverage can be obtained
from the National Aerial Photograph Library
at (613) 995-4560 or the address listed.
Canadian satellite imagery can be obtained
from the Canada Center for Remote Sensing at
(613) 990-8033 or from the address listed.
In many instances, these firms retain the
negatives for photographs flown for a
variety of clients and readily sell prints
to any interested users.
For a listing of nearby firms specializing
in these services, consult the yellow pages.
A4-12
November 1992
-------
HYDROLOGIC DATA
Source
Water Publications
of State Agencies,
Giefer and Todd
(1972, 1976)
Local Assistance
Center of the
National Water Data
Exchange (NAWDEX)
U.S. Geological
Survey
421 National Ctr.
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-5663
WATSTORE
Branch of Computer
Technology
USGS
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-5686
Information
Obtainable
This book lists state
agencies involved with
research related to water
and also lists all
publications of these
agencies.
In general, hydrologic
data can be classified
into four primary
categories: stream
discharge, stream water
qua1i ty, groundwat er
level, and groundwater
quality.
NAWDEX identifies
organizations that collect
water data, offices within
these organizations from
which the data may be
obtained, alternate
sources from which an
organization's data may be
obtained, the geographic
areas in which an
organization collects
data, and the types of
data collected.
Information has been
compiled for more than
1,700 organizations, and
information on other
organizations is added
continually. More than
450,000 data collection
sites are indexed.
WATSTORE maintains the
storage of: 1) surface-
water, quality-of-water,
and ground-water data
measured on a daily or a
continuous basis; 2)
annual peak values of
stream flow stations; 3)
chemical analyses for
surface- and ground-water
sites; 4) water-data
parameters measured more
frequently than daily; 5)
geologic and inventory
data for ground-water
sites; and 6) summary data
on water use.
Comments
The trend for the past decade has been to
compile such basic data in computerized data
banks, and a number of such information
systems are now available for private and
public users. Many data now collected by
Federal and state water-related agencies are
available through computer files, but most
data collected by private consultants, local
and county agencies, and well drilling
contractors remain with the organization
that gathered them.
NAWDEX, which began operation in 1976 and is
administered by the U.S. Geological Survey
consists of a computer directory system
which locates sources of needed water data.
The system helps to link data users to data
collectors. For example, the NAWDEX Master
Water Data Index can identify the sites at
which water data are available in a
geographic area, and the Water Data Sources
Directory can then identify the names and
addresses of organizations from which the
data may be obtained. In addition, listings
and summary counts of data, references to
other water data systems, and bibliographic
data services are available.
Data can be retrieved in machine-readable
form or as computer printed tables or
graphs, statistical analyses, and digital
plots. To retrieve WATSTORE data, contact:
National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX)
Branch of Computer Technology
USGS
Mail Stop 421
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-5664
A4-13
November 1992
-------
Source
Published Water-
Supply Studies and
Data
Catalog of
Information on Water
Geologic and Water-
Supply Reports and
Maps (available for
each state)
Water Resources
Investigations, by
State
Office of Water
Data
U.S. Geological
Survey
417 National Ctr.
12201 Sunrise
Valley Drive
Reston, VA 22092
Federal Flood
Insurance Studies
Information
Obtainable
Stream discharge,
groundwater level, and
water quality data have
been obtained during
short-term, site-specific
studies, and these data
are typically available
only in published or
unpublished site reports.
Data related to lakes,
reservoirs, and wetlands
are commonly found only in
such reports.
The reference consists of
four parts:
- Part A: Stream flow and
stage
- Part B: Quality of
surface water
- Part C: Quality of
groundwater
- Part D: Aerial
investigations and
miscellaneous
activities.
Listed are all agencies
cooperating with the USGS
in collecting water data,
information on obtaining
further information, and a
selected list of
references by both the
USGS and cooperating
agencies.
To meet the provisions of
the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968, the
USGS, with funding by the
Federal Insurance
Administration, has mapped
the 100-year floodplain of
most municipal areas at a
scale of 1:24,000.
Comments
Although significant progress has been made
in computerizing surface- and groundwater
data, the majority remains available only
through publi shed and unpubli shed report s.
Bibliographic publication indexes USGS
sampling and measurement sites throughout
the U.S. Maps are available that show a
distinct numeric code assigned to each river
basin and provide information on drainage,
culture, hydrography, and hydrologic
boundaries for each of the 21 regions and
222 subregions designated by the Water
Resources Council. They also depict the
boundaries and codes of 352 accounting units
within the National Water Data Network and
approximately 2,100 cataloging units of
survey's Catalog of Information on Water
Data.
This publication lists references for each
USGS division for each state or district,
the 1i st ing, however, i s by report number,
requiring a scan of the entire list for
information on a particular area.
This booklet describes the proj ects and
related publications for all current USGS
work in a state or group of states. Also
available is a useful summary folder with
the same title that depicts hydrologic-data
stations and hydrologic investigations in a
district as of the date of publication.
Additional assistance can be obtained by
contacting: Hydrologic Information Unit,
U.S. Geological Survey, 420 National Center,
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, Reston, VA
22092.
Floodplain maps can be obtained from the
nearest district office of the USGS and
commonly from other agencies, such as the
relevant city, town, or county planning
office, or the Federal Insurance
Administration.
In some areas, more detailed "Flood
Insurance Studies" have been completed for
the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
these maps include 100-year and 500-year
floodplain maps. The complete studies are
available at the nearest USGS office, the
relevant city, town, or county planning
office, or the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
A4-14
November 1992
-------
Source
National Stream
Quality Accounting
Network (NASQAN)
USGS
Branch of
Distribution
1200 South Ends St.
Arlington, VA 22202
Office of Water Data
Coordinat ion (OWDC)
USGS
417 National Center
Reston, VA 22092
(703) 648-5016
National Ground
Water Information
Center (National
Ground Water
Association)
6375 Riverside Drive
Dublin, OH 43017
(800) 332-2104
(614) 761-3446 (fax)
Information
Obtainable
Regional and nationwide
overview of the quality of
our streams.
Publications including the
"Nat ional Handbook of
Recommended Methods for
Water-Data Acquisition,"
indexes to the "Catalog of
Information on Water
Data," and other
publications.
Computerized, on-line
bibliographic database
that provides a variety of
information on the
quantity and quality of
ground water resources
worldwide. Also includes
references on such ground
water topics as ground
water protection, waste
remediation, well design
and construction, drilling
methods, water treatment,
and flow and contaminant
transport models.
Photocopying service of
most database references
and interlibrary loan
service available. Public
information brochures on
ground water available.
Comments
Consists of over 400 sampling sites. Data
collection sties are located at or near the
downstream end of hydrologic accounting
units or at representative sites along
coastal areas and Great Lakes.
OWDC is the focal point for inter-agency
coordination of current and planned water-
data acquisition activities of all Federal
agencies and many non-Federal organizations.
Databases are accessible through computer,
modem, and telecommunications software.
Members and nonmembers can gain access.
Abstracts are relatively short and
nontechnical.
A4-15
November 1992
-------
CLIMATIC DATA
Source
National Climatic
Data Center (NCDC)
Federal Building
37 Battery Park Ave.
Asheville, NC 28801-
2733
(704) 259-0682 or
(703) 259-0871
Information
Obtainable
Readily available are data
from the monthly
publication Climatological
Data, which reports
temperature and
precipitation statistics
for all monitoring
stations in a given state
or region. An annual
summary is also available.
In addition to collecting
basic data, NCDC provides
the following services:
- Supply of publications,
reference manuals,
catalog of holdings, and
data report atlases
- Data and map
reproduction in various
forms
- Analysis and preparation
of statistical summaries
- Evaluation of data
records for specific
analytical requirements
- Library search for
bibliographic
references, abstracts,
and documents
- Referral to
organizations holding
requested information
- Provision of general
atmospheric sciences
information.
Comments
The National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
collects and catalogs nearly all U.S.
weather records. Climatic data (which are
essential for construction planning,
environmental assessments, and conducting
surface and groundwater modeling) can be
obtained from the NCC.
NCC can provide data on file in hard (paper)
copy, in microfiche, on magnetic tape, and
on diskette.
For general summary statistics and maps, the
publication Climates of the States - NOAA
Narrative Summaries, Tables, and Maps for
Each State, by Gale Research Company (1980)
is helpful.
A4-16
November 1992
-------
EPA160014-891034
March 1991
Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and
Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells
by:
Linda Aller, Truman W. Bennett and Glen Hackett
Bennett & Williams, Inc.
Columbus, Ohio 43231
Rebecca J. Petty
Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Division of Groundwater
Columbus, Ohio 43215
Jay H. Lehr and Helen Sedoris
National Water Well Association
Dublin, Ohio 43017
David M. Nielsen
Blasland, Bouck and Lee
Westerville, Ohio 43081
Jane E. Denne (also the Project Officer)
Advanced Monitoring Systems Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-3478
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-3478
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Notice
The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency under Cooperative Agreement
Number CR-8 12350-01 to the National Water Well Association. It has been
subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review, and it has been approved
for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document has been prepared in cooperation with EMSL-LV, Office of
Research and Development. It is intended to be used as a general reference and will
not supersede program-specific guidance (e.g., the RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring
Technical Enforcement Guidance Document).
-------
Abstract
The Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and Installation of
Ground-Water Monitoring Wells is intended to assist personnel involved with the
design, construction, and installation of ground-water monitoring wells. This
document does not focus on specific regulatory requirements, but instead presents
state-of-the-art technology that may be applied in diverse hydrogeologic situations.
The "Handbook addresses field-oriented practices to solve monitoring well
construction problems rather than conceptual or idealized practices. The informa-
tion in this "Handbook" is presented in both matrix and text form. The matrices use
a relative numerical rating scheme to guide the user toward appropriate drilling
technologies for particular monitoring situations. The text provides the narrative
overview of the criteria that influence ground-water monitoring well design and
construction in various hydrogeologic settings.
The "Handbook" addresses topics ranging from initial planning for a monitoring
well to abandonment. Factors influencing monitoring well design and installation
include: purpose, location, site hydrogeology, contaminant characteristics, an-
thropogenic activities, and testing equipment that the well must accommodate.
Decontamination procedures should be planned and executed with care. Detailed
Recordkeeping from the time of well installation through sampling to abandonment
is very important. Numerous drilling and formation sampling techniques are
available, and many factors must be considered in selecting an appropriate method.
Materials for well casing, screen, filter pack, and annular sealants also should be
selected and installed carefully. Well completion and development procedures
should allow collection of representative ground-water samples and levels. Main-
tenance of monitoring wells is an important network management consideration.
Well abandonment procedures should include consideration of the monitoring well
construction, hydrogeology, and contamination at the site. The "Handbook" serves
as a general reference for the numerous factors involved in monitoring well design,
construction, and installation.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Cooperative Agreement Number
CR-812350-01 by the National Water Well Association under sponsorship of the
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada. This report
covers a period from June 1985 to May 1989, and work was completed as of June
1989.
I I I
-------
Contents
Notice -.11
Abstract Jii
Figures V1"
Tables x
Acknowledgments xi
Section
1. Introduction 1
Objectives and scope •• 1
Purpose and importance of proper ground-water monitoring well installation 1
Organization of the document 7
References 7
2. Factors influencing ground-water monitoring well design and installation 9
Geologic and hydrogeologic conditions 9
Hydrogeologic regions of the United States 9
Site-specific geologic and hydrogeologic conditions 18
Facility characteristics 18
Type of facility 19
Waste characteristics 20
Other anthropogenic influences 23
Equipment that the well must accommodate 23
Borehole geophysical tools and downhole cameras 24
Water-level measuring devices -26
Ground-water sampling devices 26
Aquifer testing procedures 26
References 27
3. Monitoring well planning considerations 29
Recordkeeping 29
Decontamination 29
Decontamination area 30
Types of equipment 32
Frequency of equipment decontamination 32
Cleaning solutions and/or wash water 32
Containment of residual contaminants and cleaning solutions and/or wash water 33
Effectiveness of decontamination procedures 34
Personnel decontamination 34
References 34
4. Description and selection of drilling methods 35
Introduction 35
Drilling methods for monitoring well installation 35
Hand augers 35
Driven wells 35
Jet percussion 36
Solid-flight augers 37
Hollow-stem augers 38
Direct mud rotary 40
Air rotary drilling 42
Air rotary with casing driver 44
Dual-wall reverse-circulation 44
Cable tool drilling 47
-------
Other drilling methods 49
Drilling fluids 49
Influence of drilling fluids on monitoring well construction 49
Drilling fluid characteristics 50
Mud-based applications 51
Air-based applications 52
Soil sampling and rock coring methods 53
Split-spoon samplers 54
Thin-wall samplers 55
Specialized soil samplers 56
Core barrels 57
Selection of drilling methods for monitoring well installation 58
Matrix purpose 58
Matrix description and development 58
How to use the matrices 61
How to interpret a matrix number 61
Criteria for evaluating drilling methods 61
Versatility of the drilling equipment and technology with respect to the hydrogeologic
conditions at the site 63
Reliability of formation (soil/rock/water) samples collected during drilling 64
Relative drilling costs 67
Availability of equipment 67
Relative time required for well installation and development 67
Ability of drilling technology to preserve natural conditions 68
Ability of the specified drilling technology to permit the installation of the proposed
casing diameter at the design depth 68
Ease of well completion and development 69
Drilling specifications and contracts 69
References 71
5. Design components of monitoring wells 73
Introduction 73
Well casing 73
Purpose of the casing 73
General casing material characteristics 73
Types of casing materials 75
Coupling procedures for joining casing 83
Well casing diameter 85
Casing cleaning requirements 86
Casing cost 86
Monitoring well intakes 86
Naturally-developed wells 87
Artificially filter-packed wells 88
Well intake design 93
Annular seals 96
Purpose of the annular seal 96
Materials used for annular seals 97
Methods for evaluating annular seal integrity 101
Surface completion and protective measures 101
Surface seals 101
Above-ground completions 101
Flush-tp-ground surface completions 102
References 102
6. Completion of monitoring wells 105
Introduction 105
Well completion techniques 105
Well intake installation 105
Filter pack installation .....106
Annular seal installation 107
Types of well completions 109
Single riser/limited-interval wells 109
Single riser/flow-through wells 109
Nested wells 110
vi
-------
Multiple-level monitoring wells Ill
General suggestions for well completions ., 112
References 112
7. Monitoring well development 115
Introduction/philosophy 115
Factors affecting monitoring well development „ 115
Type of geologic material 115
Design and completion of the well 116
Type of drilling technology 116
Well development 117
Methods of well development 117
Bailing 120
Surge block 121
Pumping/overpumping/backwashing 121
References 123
8. Monitoring well network management considerations 125
Well documentation 125
Well maintenance and rehabilitation 125
Documenting monitoring well performance 125
Factors contributing to well maintenance needs 127
Downhole maintenance 128
Exterior well maintenance 128
Comparative costs of maintenance 130
Well abandonment.... 130
Introduction 130
Well abandonment considerations 130
Well abandonment procedures 131
Grouting procedures for plugging 132
Clean-up, documentation and notification , , — 133
References 133
Master References , 134
Appendices
A. Drilling and constructing monitoring wells with hollow-stem augers 141
B. Matrices for selecting appropriate drilling equipment , 165
C. Abandonment of test holes, partially completed wells, and completed wells
(American Waterworks Association, 1984) , 207
Glossary 209
VII
-------
Figures
Number Page
1 Ground-water regions of the United States 10
2a Location of the Western Mountain Ranges region 10
2b Topographic and geologic features in the southern Rocky Mountains part of the Western
Mountain Ranges region 10
3a Location of the Alluvial Basins region 11
3b Common ground-water flow systems in the Alluvial Basins region 11
4a Location of the Columbia Lava Plateau region 11
4b Topographic and geologic features of the Columbia Lava Plateau region 11
5a Location of the Colorado Plateau and Wyoming Basin region 12
5b Topographic and geologic features of the Colorado Plateau and Wyoming Basin region 12
6a Location of the High Plains region 12
6b Topographic and geologic features of the High Plains region 12
7a Location of the Nonglaciated Central region 13
7b Topographic and geologic features of the Nonglaciated Central region 13
7c Topographic and geologic features along the western boundary of the Nonglaciated
Central region 13
8a Location of the Glaciated Central region 14
8b Topographic and geologic features of the Glaciated Central region 14
9a Location of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge region 14
9b Topographic and geologic features of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge region 14
lOa Location of the Northeast and Superior Uplands region 15
lOb Topographic and geologic features of the Northeast and Superior Uplands region 15
1 la Location of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain region 15
lib Topographic and geologic features of the Gulf Coastal Plain 15
12a Location of the Southeast Coastal Plain region 16
12b Topographic and geologic features of the Southeast Coastal Plain 16
13a Location of the Alluvial Valleys ground-water region 17
13b Topographic and geologic features of a section of the alluvial valley of the
Mississippi River 17
14 Topographic and geologic features of an Hawaiian island 17
15 Topographic and geologic features of parts of Alaska 17
16 Migration of a high density, miscible contaminant in the subsurface 21
17 Migration of a low density, soluble contaminant in the subsurface 21
18 Migration of a low density, immiscible contaminant in the subsurface 22
19 Migration of a dense, non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) in the subsurface 22
20 Sample boring log format 31
21 Format for an "as-built" monitoring well diagram 32
22 Typical layout showing decontamination areas at a hazardous materials site 33
23 Diagram of a hand auger 35
24 Diagram of a welipoint 36
25 Diagram of jet-percussion drilling 37
26 Diagram of a solid-flight auger 37
27 Typical components of a hollow-stem auger 39
28 Diagram of a screened auger 40
29 Diagram of a direct rotary circulation system 42
30 Diagram of a roller cone bit 43
31 Diagram of a down-the-hole hammer 44
32 Range of applicability for various rotary drilling methods 45
33 Diagram of a drill-through casing driver 46
34 Diagram of dual-wall reverse-circulation rotary method 46
viii
-------
35 Diagram of a cable tool drilling system 48
36 Diagrams of two types of bailers 51
37 Practical drilling fluid densities 52
38 Viscosity-building characteristics of drilling clays 52
39 Schematic of the behavior of clay particles when mixed into water 53
40 Diagram of a split-spoon sampler 55
41 Diagram of a thin-wall sampler 56
42 Two types of special soil samplers 57
43 Internal sleeve wireline piston sampler 58
44 Modified wireline piston sampler 60
45 Clam-shell fitted auger head 60
46 Types of sample retainers 60
47 Diagram of a continuous sampling tube system 61
48 Diagram of two types of core barrels 62
49 Format for a matrix on drilling method selection 63
50 Forces exerted on a monitoring well casing and screen during installation 74
51 Static compression results of Teflon® screen 77
52 Types of joints typically used between casing lengths 84
53 Effect of casing wall thickness on casing inside and outside diameter 87
54 Envelope of coarse-grained material created around a naturally developed well 88
55 Plot of grain size versus cumulative percentage of sample retained on sieve 89
56 Determining effective size of formation materials 90
57 Determining uniformity coefficient of formation materials 91
58 Envelope of coarse-grained material ernplaced around an artificially filter-packed well 91
59 Artificial filter pack design criteria 92
60 Selecting well intake slot size based on filter pack grain size 93
61 Types of well intakes 97
62 Cross-sections of continuous-wrap wire-wound screen 97
63 Potential pathways for fluid movement in the casing-borehole annulus 98
64 Segregation of artificial filter pack materials caused by gravity emplacement 106
65 Tremie-pipe emplacement of artificial filter pack materials 106
66 Reverse-circulation emplacement of artificial filter pack materials 107
67 Emplacement of artificial filter pack material by backwashing 107
68 Tremie-pipe emplacement of annular sea! material (either bentonite or neat cement slurry) 108
69 Diagram of a single-riser/now-through well 109
70 Typical nested well designs 110
71 Field-fabricated PVC multilevel sampler 111
72 Multilevel capsule sampling device installation 112
73 Multiple zone inflatable packer sampling installation 112
74 Diagrams of typical bailers used in monitoring well development 122
75 Diagram of a typical surge block 123
76 Diagram of a specialized monitoring well surge block 124
IX
-------
Tables
Number Page
1 Summary of federal programs and activities related to the protection of
ground-water quality 2
2 Federal ground-water monitoring provisions and objectives 3
3 Use and limitations of borehole geophysical tools 24
4 Descriptive information to be recorded for each monitoring well 30
5 List of selected cleaning solutions used for equipment decontamination 34
6 Applications and limitations of hand augers 38
7 Applications and limitations of driven wells 38
8 Applications and limitations of jet-percussion drilling 38
9 Applications and limitations of solid-flight augers 39
10 Applications and limitations of hollow-stem augers 41
11 Applications and limitations of direct mud rotary drilling 41
12 Applications and limitations of air rotary drilling 44
13 Applications and limitations of air rotary with casing driver drilling 47
14 Applications and limitations of dual-wall reverse-circulation rotary drilling 47
15 Applications and limitations of cable tool drilling 49
16 Principal properties of water-based drilling fluids 50
17 Approximate Marsh Funnel viscosities required for drilling in typical types of
unconsolidated materials 51
18 Drilling fluid options when drilling with air 52
19 Characteristics of common formation-sampling methods 54
20 Standard penetration test correlation chart 55
21 Index to matrices 1 through 40 59
22 Suggested areas to be addressed in monitoring well bidding specifications 69
23 Suggested items for unit cost in contractor pricing schedule 70
24 Trade names, manufacturers, and countries of origin for various fluoropolymer materials 76
25 Typical physical properties of various fluoropolymer materials 76
26 Hydraulic collapse and burst pressure and unit weight of stainless steel well casing 78
27 Typical physical properties of thermoplastic well casing materials at 73. 4°F 81
28 Hydraulic collapse pressure and unit weight of PVC well casing 81
29 Hydraulic collapse pressure and unit weight of ABS well casing 81
30 Representative classes of additives in rigid PVC materials used for pipe or well casing 83
31 Chemical parameters covered by NSF Standard 14 83
32 Volume of water in casing or borehole 86
33 Correlation chart of screen openings and sieve sizes 95
34 Typical slotted casing slot widths 96
35 Intake areas (square inches per lineal foot of screen) for
continuous wire-wound well intake 96
36 Summary of development methods for monitoring wells 118
37 Comprehensive monitoring well documentation 126
38 Additional monitoring well documentation 126
39 As-built construction diagram information 126
40 Field boring log information 127
41 Regional well maintenance problems 129
42 Chemicals used for well maintenance 129
43 Well abandonment data 133
-------
Acknowledgments
This document presents a discussion of the design and installation of ground-
water monitoring wells without specific regulatory recommendations. The infor-
mation contained within the document is the product of many experiences, both
published and unpublished to date. Assisting in the direction of the project and in
the review of various stages of the document was an able and knowledgeable
advisory committee. Although each of the individuals contributed positively, this
document is a product of the authors and may not be entirey endorsed by each of
the committee members. To the following narmed persons, grateful acknowledgment
of their contribution is made:
Roger Anzzolin, U.S. EPA, Office of Drinking Water
George Dixon, formerly with U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste
Tyler Gass, Blasland & Bouck Engineers, P.C.
lames Gibb, Geraghty & Miller, Inc.
Todd Giddings, Todd Giddings & Associates
Kenneth Jennings, U.S. EPA, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
Thomas Johnson, Levine-Fricke, Inc.
Ken McGill, formerly with U.S. EPA, Region 3
John Mann, formerly with U.S. EPA, Region 4
Roy Murphy, U.S. Pollution Control, Inc.
Marion R. Scalf, U.S. EPA, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory
Dick Young, U.S. EPA, Region 7
John Zannos, U.S. EPA, Region 1
The basic conceptual foundation for this report was supported in its infant
stages by Leslie G. McMillion, U.S. EPA, retired. A special note of acknowledg-
ment and gratitude is extended to him for his inspiration and support in starting this
document.
In addition to the committee members, many individuals assisted in adding
practical and regional perspectives to the document by participating in regional
group interviews on many aspects of monitoring well design and installation.
Thanks are also extended to the following individuals for the donation of their time
and invaluable input
John Baker, Anderson Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., California
Dala Bowlin, Jim Winneck, Inc., Oklahoma
John Braden, Braden Pump and Well Service, Mississippi
Harry Brown, Brown Drilling Company, Inc., Michigan
Kathryn Davies, U.S. EPA, Region 3
Hank Davis, Mobile Drilling, California
Tim De La Grange, De La Grange and Sons, California
Lauren Evans, Arizona Department of Health Services, Arizona
Jerry Frick, Walkerville Weil Drilling and Supply Co., Michigan
Tyler Gass, Blasland & Bouck Engineers, P.C., New York
Jim Hendry, National Water Well Association, Ohio
Tom Holdrege, Anderson Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., California
Joseph Keely, Oregon Graduate Center, Oregon
Larry Krall, Layne Environmental Services, Arizona
Bruce Kroecker, Layne Environmental Services, Kansas
David Lang, U.S. EPA, Region 1
-------
Bill Long, Jim Winneck, Inc., Oklahoma
Carl Mason, C.M. Consulting, Pennsylvania
Bill McKinnel, West Corp., Wyoming
Bruce Niermeyer, Interstate Soil Sampling, Inc., California
Harry Ridgell, Jr., Coast Water Well Service, Inc., Mississippi
Charles 0. Riggs, Central Mine Equipment Co., Missouri
Scott Sharp, Layne Environmental Services, Arizona
Bill Snyder, William Stothoff Company, Inc., New Jersey
Steve Story, Layne Environmental Services, California
Fred Strauss, Layne Environmental Services, California
Dave Sullivan, D.P. Sullivan& Daughters Drilling Finn, Inc.. Massachusetts
Bud Thorton, Associated Well Drillers, Inc., Idaho
Taylor Virdell, Virdell Drilling, Texas
Dick Willey, U.S. EPA, Region 1
Douglas Yeskis, U.S. EPA, Region 5
John Zannos, U.S. EPA, Region 1
In addition, gratitude is expressed to those individuals who participated in reviewing the
document:
Joe Abe, U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste
Doug Bedinger, Environmental Research Center, UNLV
Regina Bochicchio, Desert Research Institute, UNLV
Jane Denne, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Joe DLugosz, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Phil Durgm, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Larry Eccles, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Steven Gardner, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Jack Keeley, U.S. EPA, retired
Eric Koglm, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Lowell Leach, U.S. EPA, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory, Ada
Wayne Pettyjohn, Oklahoma State University
Mario Salazar, U.S. EPA, Office of Drinking Water
Kenneth Scarborough, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Peter Siebach, U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste
Kendrick Taylor, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada System.
Reno
John Worlund, U.S. EPA, EMSL - Las Vegas
Kendrick Taylor also provided information contained in the borehole geophysical
tool section of the document.
XII
-------
Section 1
Introduction
Objectives and Scope
The Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and
Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells has been pre-
pared as an aid to owners and operators of facilities as well as
others concerned with proper installation of ground-water
monitoring wells. This document is also designed to assist state
and federal authorities in evaluating all aspects of monitoring
well design and installation in varying hydrogeologic settings.
Information contained within this publication does not address
specific regulatory requirements, which must be followed, but
rather presents state-of-the-art technology that can be used in
differing situations.
This document is intended to be both informative and
descriptive in nature. The objectives are to provide a concise
description of the components of monitoring well design and
installation and to detail the applicability of various drilling
techniques in diverse hydrogeologic regimes. The information
is presented in both text and matrix form. Through a relative
numerical rating scheme, the matrix guides the user toward
appropriate drilling technology for particular monitoring situ-
ations.
Impetus for the development of the Handbook of Sug-
gested Practices for the Design and Installation of Ground-
WaterMonitoring Wells was provided by the passage of a series
of federal laws which addressed the need to protect ground-
water quality. Table 1 lists the laws enacted by Congress and
summarizes the applicable ground-water activities associated
with each law. Of the sixteen statutes listed in Table 1, ten
statutes have regulatory programs which establish ground-
water monitoring requirements for specific sources of con-
tamination. Table 2 summarizes the objectives and monitoring
provisions of the federal acts. While the principal objectives of
the laws are to obtain background water-quality data and to
evaluate whether or not ground water is being contaminated, the
monitoring provisions contained within the laws vary signifi-
cantly. Acts may mandate that ground-water monitoring
regulations be adopted, or they may address the need for the
establishment of guidelines to protect ground water. Further,
some statutes specify the adoption of rules that must be
implemented uniformly throughout the United States, while
others authorize adoption of minimum standards that may be
made more stringent by state or local regulations.
With such diverse statutes mandating ground-water
monitoring requirements, it is not surprising that the regula-
tions promulgated under the authority of the statutes also vary
in scope and specificity. In general, most regulations further
define the objectives of the statute and clarify the performance
standards to achieve the stated objectives.
More specific ground-water monitoring recommendations
can be found in the numerous guidance documents and direc-
tives issued by agencies responsible for implementation of the
regulations. Examples of guidance documents include the Of-
fice of Waste Programs Enforcement Technical Enforcement
Guidance Document (TEGD) (United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1986), the Office of Solid Waste Documents
SW-846 (Wehran Engineering Corporation, 1977) and SW-
611 (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987).
The purpose of this "Handbook is to be a general (non-
program-specific) reference to provide the user with a practical
decision-making guide for designing and installing monitoring
wells, and it will not supersede program-specific guidance.
Purpose and Importance of Proper Ground-Water
Monitoring Well Installation
The primary objective of a monitoring well is to provide an
access point for measuring ground-water levels and to permit
the procurement of ground-water samples that accurately rep-
resent in-situ ground-water conditions at the specific point of
sampling. To achieve this objective, it is necessary to fulfill the
following criteria:
1) construct the well with minimum disturbance to
the formation;
2) construct the well of materials that are compatible
with the anticipated geochemical and chemical
environment
3) properly complete the well in the desired zone;
4) adequately seal the well with materials that will
not interfere with the collection of representative
water-quality samples; and
5) sufficiently develop the well to remove any
additives associated with drilling and provide
unobstructed flow through the well.
In addition to appropriate construction details, the moni-
toring well must be designed in concert with the overall goals
of the monitoring program. Key factors that must be considered
include:
1) intended purpose of the well;
2) placement of the well to achieve accurate water
levels and/or representative water-quality samples
3) adequate well diameter to accommodate
appropriate tools for well development, aquifer
testing equipment and water-quality sampling
devices; and
4) surface protection to assure no alteration of the
structure or impairment of the data collected from
the well.
1
-------
Table 1. Summary of Federal Programs and Activities Related to the Protection of Ground-Water Quality (after Office of Technology Assessment, 1984)
Investiaationa/d ejection
Ground-water
Ambient monitoring Waler
Statutes Inventories ground-water related supply
of source' monitoring to sources' monitoring
Atomic Energy Act
Clean Water Act X
Coastal Zone
Management Act
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation
and Liability Act X
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act
Federal Land Policy end
Management Act (and
associated mining laws) . . .
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Act X
Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act X
National Environmental
Policy Ad
Reclamation Act
Resource Conservation end
Recovery Act X
Safe Drinking Water Act X
Surface Mining Control and
Redemption Act
Toxic Substances Control Act
Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act
Water Research and
Development Act
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
£nn£r
Federally
funded
remedial
actions
X
X
X
X
X
X
lion Prevention
Regulatory Regulate Standards for
requirements chemical new/existing Aquifer
for sources' production sources' protection Standards Other"
X XX
X XX
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X XX
X
X X
X X
X
'Programs and activities under this heading relate directly to specific sources of groundwater contamination.
'This category includes activities such as research and development and grants to the states to develop ground-water related programs.
-------
TABLE 2. FEDERAL GROUND-WATER MONITORING PROVISIONS AND OBJECTIVES (AFTER OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY
ASSESSMENT, 1984)
Statutory authority
Monitoring provisions'"
Monitoring objectives
Atomic Energy Act
Clean Water Act
—Sections 201 and 405
—Section 208
Coastal Zone Management Act
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act-
Section 3
Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (and
associated mining laws)
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Act
Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act
National Environmental
Policy Act
Reclamation Act
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations tor low-level
radioactive waste disposal sites. The facility license must specify the monitoring
requirements for the source. The monitoring program must include:
—Pre-operational monitoring program conducted over a 12-month period.
Parameters not specified.
—Monitoring during construction and operation to provide early warning of
releases of radionuclides from the site. Parameters and sampling frequencies
not specified.
—Post-operational monitoring program to provide early warning of releases of
radionuclides from the site. Parameters and sampling frequencies not
specified. System design is based on operating history, closure, and
stabilization of the site.
Ground-water monitoring related to the development of geologic repositories will
be conducted. Measurements will include the rate and location of water inflow
into subsurface areas and changes in ground-water conditions.
Ground-water monitoring may be conducted by DOE, as necessary, as part of
remedial action programs at storage and disposal facilities for radioactive
substances.
Ground-water monitoring requirements are established on a case-by-case basis
for the land application of wastewater and sludge from sewage treatment
plants.
No explicit requirements are established; however, ground-water monitoring
studies are being conducted by SCS under the Rural Clean Water Program to
evaluate the impacts of agricultural practices and to design and determine the
effectiveness of Best Management Practices.
The statute does not authorize development of regulations for sources. Thus, any
ground-water monitoring conducted would be the result of requirements
established by a State plan (e.g., monitoring with respect to salt-water
intrusion) authorized and funded by CZMA.
Ground-water monitoring may be conducted by EPA {or a State) as necessary to
respond to releases of any hazardous substance, contaminant, or pollutant (as
defined by CERCLA),
No monitoring requirements established for pesticide users. However, monitoring
may be conducted by EPA in instances where certain pesticides are
contaminating ground water.b
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for geothermal
recovery operations on Federal lands for a period of at least one year prior to
production. Parameters and monitoring frequency are not specified.
Explicit ground-water monitoring requirements for mineral operations on Federal
lands are not established in Federal regulations. Monitoring may be required
(as a permit condition) by BLM.
Although the statute authorizes development of regulations for certain pipelines
for public safety purposes, the regulatory requirements focus on design and
operation and do not provide for ground-water monitoring.
Although the statute authorizes development of regulations for transportation for
public safety purposes, the regulatory requirements focus on design and
operation and do not provide for ground-water monitoring.
The statute does not authorize development of regulations for sources.
No explicit requirements established; however, monitoring may be conducted, as
necessary, as part of water supply development projects.
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for all hazardous
waste land disposal facilities (e.g., landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles,
and land treatment units).
To obtain background water quality data and to
evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
To confirm geotechnical and design parameters and to
ensure that the design of the geologic repository
accommodates actual field conditions.
To characterize a contamination problem and to select
and evaluate the effectiveness of corrective
measures.
To evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
To characterize a contamination problem and to select
and evaluate the effectiveness of corrective
measures.
To characterize a contamination problem (e.g., to
assess the impacts of the situation, to identify or
verify the source(s), and to select and evaluate the
effectiveness of corrective measures).
To characterize a contamination problem.
To obtain background water-quality data.
-------
Table 2. (Continued)
Statutory authority
Monitoring provisions"
Monitoring objectives
Reclamation Act
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
-Subtitle C
No explicit requirements established; however, monitoring maybe conducted, as
necessary, as part of water supply development projects.
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for all hazardous
waste land disposal facilities (e.g., landfills, surface impoundments, waste piles,
and land treatment units).
Facilities in existence on the effective date of statutory or regulatory amendments
under the act that would make the facility subject to the requirements to have a
RCRA permit must meet interim Status monitoring requirements until a final per-
mit is issued. These requirements specify the installation of at feast one upgra-
dient well and three downgradient wells. Samples must be taken quarterly during
the first year and analyzed for the National Drinking Water Regulations, water
quality parameters (chloride, iron, manganese, phenols, sodium and sulfate), and
indicator parameters (pH, specific conductance, TOC and TOX). In subsequent
years, each well is sampled and analyzed annually for the six background water-
quality parameters and semi-annually for the four indicator parameters,
If contaminant leakage has been detected during detection monitoring, the owner or
operator of an interim status facility must undertake assessment monitoring. The
owner or operator must determine the vertical and horizontal concentration pro-
files of all the hazardous waste constituents in the plume(s) escaping from waste
management units.
Ground-water monitoring requirements can be waived by an owner/operator if a
written determination indicating that there is low potential for waste migration via
the uppermost aquifer to water supply wells or surface water is made and certified
by a qualified geologist or engineer. Ground-water monitoring requirements for a
surface impoundment may be waived if(1) it is used to neutralize wastes which
are hazardous solely because they exhibit the corrosivity characteristic under
Section 261.22 or are fisted in Subpart D of Part 261 and (2) contains no other
hazardous waste. The owner or operator must demonstrate that there is no poten-
tial for migration of the hazardous wastes from the impoundment. The demonstra-
tion must be in writing and must be certified by a qualified professional.
The monitoring requirement for a fully permitted facility are comprised of a three-
part program:
-Detection Monitoring - implemented when a permit is issued and there is
no indication of leakage from a facility. Parameters are speeded in the
permit. Samples must be taken and analyzed at feast semi-annually for
active life of regulated unit and the post-closure care period. If there is a
statistically significant increase in parameters specified in permit, owner
or operator must notify Regional Administrator and sample ground water
in all monitoring wells for Appendix IX constituents.
-Compliance Monitoring - Implemented when ground-water
contamination is detected. Monitoring is conducted to determine whether
To obtain background water-quality data and
evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
To obtain background water-quality data or
evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated (detection monitoring), to
determine whether groundwater quality
standards are being met (compliance
monitoring), and to evaluate the effectiveness
of corrective action measures.
(Continued)
-------
Table 2. (Continued)
Statutory authority
Monitoring provisions'
Monitoring objectives
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (cont.)
-Subtitle C (cont.)
or not regulated units are in compliance with the ground-water protection
standard specified in facility permit. Samples must be taken and analyzed
at least quarterly for parameters specified in the permit. Samples must
also be analyzed for a specific list of constituents (Appendix IX to
Part 284).
-Corrective Action Monitoring - Implemented if compliance monitoring
indicates that specified concentration levels for specified parameters are
being exceeded and corrective measures are required. Monitoring must
continue until specified concentration levels are met. Parameters and
monitoring frequency not specified.
-Exemptions are provided from these regulations for owner or operator
exempted under Section 284.1, or if Regional Administrator finds unit is
engineered structure; does not receive or contain liquid waste or waste
containing free liquids; is designed and operated to exclude liquids
precipitation, and other run-on and run-off; has both inner end outer
containment layers; has a leak detection system built into each
containment layer; owner or operator will provide continuing operation
and maintenance of leak detection systems; and to a reasonable degree of
certainty will not allow hazardous constituents to migrate beyond the
outer containment layer prior to end of post-closure care period.
-Subtitle D
The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments require EPA to revise criteria
for solid waste management facilities that may receive household hazardous
waste or small quantity generator hazardous waste. At a minimum, the
revisions must require ground-water monitoring, establish location criteria and
provide for corrective action.
On August 30, 1988, EPA published proposed rules requiring ground-water
monitoring at all new and existing municipal solid waste landfills.
-Subtitle I
Ground-water monitoring is one of the release detection options available for
owners and operators of petroleum underground storage tanks. It is also an
option at existing hazardous substance underground storage tanks until
December 22, 1998. At the end of this period, owners and operators must upgrade
or replace this release detection method with secondary containment and intersti-
tial monitoring unless a variance is obtained.
Safe Drinking Water Act
-Part C-Underground
Injection Control Program
Ground-water monitoring requirements may be specified in a facility permit for
injection wells used for in-situ or solution mining of minerals (Class III wells)
where injection is into a formation containing less than 1 0,000 mg/1 TDS.
Parameters and monitoring frequency not specified except in areas subject to
subsidence or collapse where monitoring is required on a quarterly basis.
Ground-water monitoring may also be specified in a permit for wells which inject
beneath the deepest underground source of drinking water (Class I wells).
Parameters and monitoring frequency not specified in Federal regulations.
To evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
(Continued)
-------
Table 2. (Continued)
Statutory authority
Monitoring provisions*
Monitoring objectives
Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act
Toxic Substance Control Act
-Section 6
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for surface and
underground coal mining operations to determine the impacts on the
hydrologic balance of the mining and adjacent areas. A ground-water
monitoring plan must be developed for each mining operation (including
reclamation). At a minimum, parameters must include total dissolved solids or
specific conductance, pH, total iron, and total manganese. Samples must be
taken and analyzed on a quarterly basis.
Monitoring of a particular water-bearing stratum may be waived by the regulatory
authority if it can be demonstrated that it is not a stratum which serves as an
aquifer that significantly ensures the hydrologic balance of the cumulative
impact area.
Ground-water monitoring specified in Federal regulations requires monitoring
prior to commencement of disposal operations for RGBs. Only three wells are
required if underlying earth materials are homogeneous, impermeable and
uniformly sloping in one direction. Parameters include (at a minimum) PCBs,
pH, specific conductance, and chlorinated organics. Monitoring frequency not
specified.
No requirements are established for active life or after closure.
To obtain background water-quality date and
evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
To obtain background water-quality data
-------
If proper monitoring well design and construction tech-
niques are not employed during monitoring well installation,
the data collected from the well may not be reliable. For
example, Sosebee et al. (1983) determined that the solvent used
to weld lengths of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing together can
leach significant amounts of tetrahydrofuran, methylethyl ke-
tone, methylbutyl ketone, and other synthetic organic chemi-
cals into water that comes in contact with the solvent-welded
casing joint. This could result in false determinations of the
presence of certain chemical constituents in water samples
taken from PVC wells in which the joints were solvent welded.
Monitoring well installation procedures can also have a
significant impact on the integrity of ground-water samples.
For example, Brobst and Buszka (1986) found that organic
drilling fluids and bentonite drilling muds used in mud rotary
drilling can have an effect on the chemical oxygen demand of
ground water adjacent to the wellbore in a rotary-drilled well.
This, in turn, can affect the quality of a water sample taken from
such a well, resulting in the acquisition of non-representative
ground-water samples.
Vertical seepage of leachate along well casing can also
produce non-representative samples. Monitoring wells are
frequently sealed with neat cement grout, bentonite, or a ce-
ment-bentonite mixture. The correct choice of a grout and the
proper emplacement method to ensure a seal are critical to
assure ground-water sample integrity and prevent cross con-
tamination of aquifers. Wehrmann (1983) noted that while a
neat cement grout is often recommended, shrinkage and cracking
of the cement upon curing can create an improper seal. Kurt and
Johnson (1982) have presented the case that the smooth surface
of thermoplastic casing provides a potential path for vertical
leakage between the casing and the grout material. The impli-
cations of the impact of adhesion, including chemical bonding,
versus swell pressure have not been documented in the litera-
ture. However, it is known that vertical leakage between the
casing and the grout material may occur because of swelling
and shrinkage during the curing of the grout.
This brief synopsis of potential problems associated with
improper monitoring well design and installation illustrates that
there are a number of design elements that must be addressed in
proper monitoring well construction. This manual attempts to
discuss the basic elements that lead to the construction of a
viable monitoring well. Where appropriate, potential problems
or pitfalls are discussed.
Organization of the Document
This document contains 8 major sections and 3 supporting
appendices. A complete list of references can be found imme-
diately following Section 8, Section 1, "Introduction," provides
an explanation of the impetus for this "Handbook" and includes
a brief discussion of the regulatory framework for ground-water
monitoring regulations. Section 2, "Factors Influencing Ground-
Water Monitoring Well Design and Installation," discusses the
importance of sizing a monitoring well in accordance with the
intended purpose of the well. Section 2 also describes the
importance of monitoring well location and the influence of
hydrogeology, contaminant characteristics and anthropogenic
influences on monitoring well design. Section 3, "Monitoring
Well Planning Considerations," explains the importance of
keeping detailed records during the entire existence of the
monitoring well from installation through sampling to aban-
donment. A discussion of the necessity of decontamination
procedures for drilling equipment used during monitoring well
installation is also included in this section. Section 4, "Descrip-
tion and Selection of Drilling Methods," includes a brief dis-
cussion of drilling and sampling methods used during monitor-
ing well construction and the advantages and disadvantages of
each technique. The focus of this section is a set of matrices
(included in Appendix B) that indicate favorable drilling
techniques for monitoring wells with certain specifications
drilled in selected hydrogeologic settings. Section 5, "Design
Components of Monitoring Wells," describes the materials and
installation techniques for casing, well intakes, and filter packs.
A discussion of grout mixtures and emplacement techniques is
also presented. Section 6, "Completion of Monitoring Wells,"
provides a description of well completion techniques and types
of well completions designed to maximize collection of repre-
sentative ground-water samples. Section 7, "Monitoring Well
Development," discusses the importance of proper develop-
ment and describes techniques Used in monitoring wells. Sec-
tion 8, "Monitoring Well Network Management Considerations,"
discusses the importance of maintenance and proper well
abandonment coupled with the necessity for Recordkeeping.
Also included within the document are a glossary and three
supporting Appendices. The glossary contains pertinent ground-
water monitoring terms. Appendix A contains a detailed dis-
cussion of installing monitoring wells with a hollow-stem
auger. Appendix B includes a set of matrices designed to assist
in the selection of drilling technologies. Appendix C is a
reproduction of a standard for well abandonment.
References
Brobst,R.D. and P.M. Buszka, 1986. The effect of three drilling
fluids on ground-water sample chemistry; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 62-70.
Kurt, Carl E. and R.C. Johnson, Jr., 1982. Permeability of grout
seals surrounding thermoplastic well casing; Ground
Water, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 415419.
Office of Technology Assessment, 1984. Protecting the
nation's ground water from contamination, vols. I and II;
United States Congress, Washington, D.C., 503 pp.
Sosebee, J.B., P.C. Geiszler, D.L. Winegardner and C.R
Fisher, 1983. Contamination of ground-water samples
with PVC adhesives and PVC primer from monitor
wells; Proceedings of the ASTM Second Symposium on
Hazardous and Industrial Solid Waste Testing, ASTMSTP
805, R.A. Conway and W.P. Gulledge, eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, pp. 38-50.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document; Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER-9950.1,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 317 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. Test
methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical
methods (SW-846); Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.,
519pp.
7
-------
Wehran Engineering Corporation, 1977. Procedures manual Wehrmann, H. Allen, 1983. Monitoring well design and
for ground-water monitoring at solid waste disposal facilities construction; Ground Water Age, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 35-38.
(SW-61 1); National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Virginia, 269 pp.
-------
Section 2
Factors Influencing Ground-Water
Monitoring Well Design and Installation
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Conditions
The geologic and hydrogeologic conditions at a site affect
the occurrence and movement of ground water and contaminant
transport in the subsurface. Concomitantly, these two factors
significantly influence the design and construction techniques
used to install a monitoring well. The following discussion of
the geologic and hydrogeologic conditions pertinent to the
design and construction of monitoring wells is divided into two
parts. The first part addresses regional geologic and hydrogeo-
logic conditions that impact ground-water occurrence, and
hence the types of water-bearing materials that are likely to be
monitored. Non-exploitable aquifers in some cases, must also
be monitored. The second part of this discussion focuses more
on site-specific geologic and hydrogeologic conditions that can
affect the design of a monitoring well and selection of an
appropriate method for drilling and constructing the well.
Hydrogeologic Regions of the United States
Heath (1984) has developed a classification system that
divides the United States into ground-water regions based on
ground-water occurrence and availability. Because the presence
of ground water in the subsurface is closely related to geologic
conditions, areas with similar rock composition and structure
tend to form similar ground-water regions. The classification
system developed by Heath (1984) uses the type and interre-
lationship of the aquifers in an area as the major division for
regional designation. Additional factors including: 1) primary
versus secondary porosity, 2) mineral composition of the aquifer,
3) hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer, and 4) the effects of
recharge and/or discharge areas were used to further define
each region. Figure 1 illustrates the division of the United States
into 15 ground-water regions. For the purposes of this discus-
sion, however, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands will be
excluded. Because the primary focus of this discussion is
limited to the hydrogeologic conditions pertinent to monitoring
well construction, the reader is referred to Heath (1984) for
additional information on each ground-water region.
Western Mountain Ranges —
The Western Mountain Ranges are comprised of tall,
massive mountains separated by narrow, steep-sided valleys. In
many areas, the mountains have been subjected to alpine
glaciation. Major lowland areas occur between the mountain
ranges in the southern part of this region. With geologic origins
related to major erogenic and tectonic events, most of the
mountain ranges are comprised of metamorphic and igneous
rocks flanked by consolidated sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic
to Cenozoic age. Other mountain ranges such as the Cascades
and the San Juan mountains are composed primarily of basaltic
lava.
Bare bedrock exposures or a thin layer of weathered
material cover the slopes and summits of the mountains. The
weathered layer tends to thicken toward the base of the moun-
tains and in the alluvial valleys. Figures 2a and 2b illustrate the
location and main geologic and hydrogeologic features of this
region. Despite high precipitation rates in the region, ground-
water resources are primarily limited to the storage capacity of
the fractures in the crystalline rocks that serve as an aquifer for
this area. The lowlands between the mountain ranges contain
thick deposits of fine to coarse-grained alluvium eroded from
the adjacent mountains. These deposits serve as aquifers that
are capable of supplying moderate to large yields to wells. The
alluvial aquifers are often in direct hydraulic connection with
the underlying bedrock.
Alluvial Basins —
The Alluvial Basins region is comprised of thick alluvial
deposits in structural lows alternating with igneous and meta-
morphic mountain ranges. This region covers two distinctive
areas: 1) the Basin and Range area of the southwest and 2) the
Puget Sound/Willamette Valley Area of the Pacific Northwest
(Figure 3a).
The Basin and Range area consists of basins filled with
thick deposits of unconsolidated alluvial material eroded from
the adjacent mountains and deposited as coalescing alluvial
fans. The alluvial materials in the fans are typically coarsest
near the mountains and become progressively finer toward the
center of the basin. These basins typically form closed-basin
systems where no surface or subsurface flow leaves the region.
However, water may move through the permeable deposits and
actually move between basins in a complex hydrogeologic
relationship as illustrated in Figure 3b. Most ground water in
this region is obtained from the permeable sand and gravel
deposits that are interbedded with finer-grained layers of
saturated silts and clays.
The alluvial deposits of the Puget Sound were deposited by
sediment-laden meltwater from successive glaciation. Thick
layers of permeable sands and gravels that are interbedded with
discontinuous clay layers provide the majority of the water
resources for this area. The Willamette Valley consists of
interbedded sands, silts and clays deposited by the Willamette
River and related streams. High precipitation rates in the region
provide the major source of recharge to these aquifers.
The mountains bordering these alluvial basins consist of
igneous and metamorphic rocks ranging from Precambrian to
Tertiary in age. The limited water resources in the mountains
are derived from water stored in fractures in the bedrock.
-------
2. Alluvial Basin
1. Western
Mountain Ranges
15. Puerto Rico
and
Virgin Islands
800
n
9. Northeast and
Superior Uplands
1. Western
Mountain Ranges
6. Nonglaciated
Central Region
\ 7. Glaciated
Central Region
6. Nonqlaaated
Centra Region
4. Colorado Plateau
and Wyoming Basin
11. Southeast
Coastal Plain
7. Glaciated
Central
Region
6. Nonglaciated
Central Region
8. Piedmont and
Blue Ridge
Figure 1. Ground-water regions of the United States (Heath, 1984).
(a)
Figure 2a. Location of the Western Mountain Ranges region
(Heath, 1984).
(b)
Figure 2b. Topographic and geologic features In the southern
Rocky Mountains part of the Western Mountain
Ranges region (Heath, 1984).
10
-------
Figure 3a. Location of the Alluvial Basins region (Heath, 1984).
(b)
Figure 3b. Common ground-water flow systems In the Alluvial
Basins region (Heath, 1984).
(a)
Figure 4a. Location of the Columbia Lava Plateau region
(Heath, 1984).
Older Mountains
Explanation
Present Soil Zone
\ Interflow
Lava *rrrar-VZone
iiltj and CJay
Cooling Fractures
(b)
Figure 4b. Topographic and geologic features of the Columbia
Lava Plateau region (Health, 1984).
Columbia Lava Plateau —
The Columbia Lava Plateau consists of a sequence of lava
flows ranging in total thickness from less than 150 feet adjacent
to mountain ranges to over 3,000 feet in south-central Washing-
ton and northern Idaho (Figure 4a). The lava is composed of
basalt that erupted from extensive fissures and produced large
sheet-like flows. The lava beds comprise the principal water-
bearing unit in the region.
Ground water in basalt flows through the permeable zones
that occur at the contacts between the lava flow layers (Figure
4b). The permeable zones result from the cooling of the crust on
the molten lava as it continues to flow thus producing a zone of
fragments and gas bubbles near the top of the lava sheet.
Cooling of the lava sheet itself also produces vertical fracturing
within the basalt. These interflow zones, created by the cooling
crust, form a complex series of relatively horizontal aquifers
separated by denser layers of basalt that are often hydraulically
interconnected by the intersecting fractures and faults within
the lava sheets.
The region can be divided into two separate hydrogeologic
flow regimes. The Columbia River Group, in the western part
of this region, consists of relatively thick basalt flows that have
been offset by normal faults. Primary water movement is
through shallow interflow zones. The aquifers are typically
poorly hydraulically interconnected because the flow is con-
trolled by the faults which form barrier-controlled reservoirs.
The remainder of the region, occupied by the Snake River
Plain, consists of a series of thin lava flows with well-developed
interflow zones and extensive fracturing. These interflow
zones exhibit high hydraulic conductivities and are hydrauli-
cally interconnected by cooling fractures. The large differences
in hydraulic conductivity between the interflow zones and the
denser basalt often result insignificant differences in hydraulic
head between aquifers. Consequently, there is the potential for
the movement of water between aquifers through uncased or
improperly cased wells.
Recharge to the aquifer is from precipitation and infiltra-
tion from streams that flow onto the plateau from adjacent
11
-------
mountains. Irrigation of crops in this region provides additional
recharge to the aquifer through the interflow zones when the
source of water is not from the aquifer.
Colorado Plateau and Wyoming Basin —
The Colorado Plateau and Wyoming Basin region is char-
acterized by abroad structural plateau underlain by horizontal
to gently dipping beds of consolidated sedimentary rock. In
some areas, the structure of the plateau has been modified by
faulting and folding that resulted in basin and dome features.
The region contains small, isolated mountain ranges as well as
extinct volcanoes and lava fields (Figures 5a and 5b).
The sedimentary rocks in this region consist of Paleozoic-
to Cenozoic-age sandstones, limestones and shales. Evaporitic
rocks such as gypsum and halite also occur in some areas. The
sandstones serve as the principal source of ground water. Water
within the sandstone is contained within pore spaces and in
fractures and bedding planes. Minor deposits of unconsolidated
alluvium occur in major river valleys and contribute small to
moderate yields of ground water.
Recharge to the aquifers is from precipitation and from
infiltration from streams that cross the outcrop areas. The gentle
dip of the beds causes unconfined conditions in outcrop areas
and confined conditions downdip. Aquifers in the region fre-
quently contain mineralized water at depth. Aquifers typically
discharge to springs and seeps along canyon walls.
High Plains —
The High Plains region represents a remnant of an alluvial
plain deposited by streams and rivers that flowed eastward from
the Rocky Mountains during the Tertiary period. Extensive
erosion has subsequently removed a large portion of the plain,
including most areas adjacent to the mountains.
The High Plains region is underlain primarily by the
Ogallala formation, a thick deposit of semi-consolidated allu-
vial materials consisting of poorly-sorted sands, gravels, silts
and clays (Figures 6a and 6b). The Ogallala formation is the
major aquifer and is overlain locally by younger alluvial mate-
rial that is often saturated and forms a part of the aquifer. In
places where the Ogallala is absent, these younger alluvial
deposits, that are comprised of unconsolidated sand, gravel, silt
and clay, are used as the major aquifer. Extensive areas of
surficial sand dunes are also present. In some areas, older
underlying consolidated deposits that include the fine-grained
sandstones of the Arikaree Group and Brule formation are
(a)
Figure 5a. Location of the Colorado Plateau and Wyoming
Basin reqion (Heath, 1984).
Figure 6a. Location of the High Plains region (Heath, 1984).
Cliff
Fault Scan
Extinct Volcanoesc_-__Ridges Dome
Plane River
Explanation
LHwater C3Sandstone
r—iSalty ^Limestone
'-'"Water ,-^Metamorphic
QShale ^Rocks
(b)
Figure 5b. Topographic and geologic features of the Colorado
Plateau and Wyoming Basin region (Heath, 1984).
xplanation
GUSand S
Gravel Sandstone
(b)
Figure 6b. Topographic and geologic features of the High Plains
region (Heath, 1984).
-------
hydraulically connected to the Ogallala. Where these deposits
are absent, the Ogallala is underlain by other sedimentary rocks
that often contain unusable, highly mineralized water.
Recharge to the aquifer from precipitation varies across the
area. The presence of caliche, a low permeability calcium
carbonate layer at or near the land surface, limits the amount of
precipitation that infiltrates to the aquifer, thereby increasing
the amount of water lost to evaporranspiration. In the sand
dunes area, however, the permeability of the surface materials
allows increased recharge to the aquifer.
Extensive development of the aquifer for agricultural irri-
gation has led to long-term declines in water levels. Where
ground-water withdrawal rates have exceeded available re-
charge to the aquifer, ground-water mining has occurred. The
depletion of water from storage in the High Plains region has
resulted in a decrease in the saturated thickness of the aquifer in
areas of intensive irrigation.
Nongladated Central Region —
The Nonglaciated Central region covers a geologically
complex area extending from the Appalachian Mountains to the
Rocky Mountains. Most of the region is underlain by consoli-
dated sedimentary rocks, including sandstones, shales, car-
bonates and conglomerates that range from Paleozoic to Ter-
tiary in age (Figures 7a, 7b and 7c). These rocks are typically
horizontal to gently dipping with the exception of a few areas,
notably the Valley and Ridge section; the Wichita and Arbuckle
mountains in Oklahoma, the Ouachita Mountains in Oklahoma
and Arkansas; and the Triassic basins in Virginia and North
Carolina. The Triassic basins contain interbedded shales,
sandstones and conglomerates that have been faulted and
invaded by igneous rocks.
Chemical and mechanical weathering of the bedrock has
formal a layer of regolith that varies in thickness and compo-
sition depending on the composition and structure of the under-
lying parent rock and the effects of climate and topography. The
sandstones and limestones constitute the major aquifers in the
area. Water occurs primarily in bedding planes and fractures in
the bedrock. Many of the limestones contain solution channels
that increase the permeability. Limestones in this region often
form extensive cave systems that directly affect patterns of
ground-water flow.
Recharge in the region occurs primarily from precipitation
in outcrop areas and varies widely. Small to moderate well
yields are common; higher yields may be available in karstic
areas. Well yields often depend on the size and number of
fractures intersected by the well, the recharge to the area and the
storage capacity and permeability of the bedrock and/or rego-
lith. In many parts of this region, mineralized water occurs at
depths greater than 300 feet.
Glaciated Central Region —
The geology of the Glaciated Central region is character-
ized by relatively horizontal sedimentary recks of Paleozoic to
Tertiary age consisting of sandstones, shales and carbonates.
The bedrock is overlain by varying thicknesses of poorly-sorted
glacial till that is interbedded with: 1) well-sorted sands and
gravels deposited from meltwater streams, 2) clays and silts
Figure 7a. Location of the Nonglaciated Central region
(Heath, 1984).
Regolith
jdi '^rn^-T' • • •. "C0?^ ' v^~
•"-::.'-i-y.v-\.-f--:- .'~^* .Limestoi
Sec)dfng"-Plar"'" >r"":"""r"T"
Fractures
I I Fresh Water
OO Salty Water
(b)
Figure 7b. Topographic and geologic features of the
Nonglaciated Central region (Heath, 1984).
i—, Fresh
1—I Water
Explanation
t '-'ISandstone
E~3 Shale
Metamorphic
Racks
(c)
Figure 7c. Topographic and geologic features along the western
boundary of the Nonglaciated Central region (Heath,
1984).
13
-------
from glacial lake beds and 3) wind-blown silt or loess deposits
(Figures 8a and 8b).
In the eastern part of the region, the glacial deposits are
typically thin on the uplands and thicken locally in valleys.
Toward the central and western parts of the region, glacial
deposits are thicker and often mask the location of preglacial
river valleys. These thick deposits in the preglacial river valleys
often contain permeable sands and gravels that form major
aquifers with significant well yields. Overlying till deposits
often act as confining layers for the underlying sand and gravel
aquifers.
The underlying bedrock in this region also commonly
serves as an aquifer. Water occurs primarily along bedding
planes and in fractures. Frequently the glacial deposits and the
bedrock are hydraulically interconnected. The glacial deposits
often provide recharge to the bedrock aquifers and serve as a
source of water for shallow wells. Movement of poor-quality
water from the bedrock into the glacial deposits may cause local
ground-water quality problems. Recharge to the glacial deposits
is provided by precipitation and by infiltration from streams.
Recharge rates primarily vary with precipitation rates, evapo-
transpiration rates, permeability of the glacial materials and
topography.
Ground-water supplies are abundant in this area well
yields are moderate to high. Smaller yields are expected in areas
where the glacial deposits are fine-grained or where the un-
derlying bedrock has an insufficient amount of fractures or
solutioning. Because of the widespread occurrence of carbon-
ate rocks, ground water in these areas frequently exhibits high
hardness.
Piedmont and Blue Ridge —
The Piedmont lies between the coastal plain and the Appa-
lachian Mountains. The region is characterized by a series of
low, rounded hills that gradually increase in height toward the
west and culminate in the parallel ranges of the Appalachian
Mountains in the north and the Blue Ridge Mountains in the
south. The bedrock of the region consists of Precambrian to
Mesozoic-age igneous, metamorphosed-igneous and sedi-
mentary rocks (Figures 9a and 9b).
(a)
Figure 8a. Location of the Glaciated Cantral region (Heath,
1984).
(a)
Figure 9a. Location of the Piedmont and Blue Ridge region
(Heath, 1984).
Moraine
Loess
BedrockOutcrops
i 1 c- u .., Best Wel1 Sites
LJ Fresh Water |ndicated Wlth X's
I I Salty Water
(b)
(b)
Figure 8b. Topographic and geologic features of the Glaciated Figure 9b. Topographic and geologic features of the Piedmont
Central region (Heath, 1984). and Blue Ridge region (Heath, 1984).
14
-------
Active chemical and physical weathering of the bedrock
has formed a clay-rich, unconsolidated deposit that overlies
bedrock. This deposit, called saprolite or regolith is typically
thinner on ridges and thickens on slopes and in valleys. Larger
streams in many valleys have deposited significant thicknesses
of well-sorted alluvial materials that often overlie the saprolite.
The regolith serves two purposes in the ground-water
system: 1) the regolith yields small to moderate quantities of
water to shallow wells and 2) the regolith serves as a storage
reservoir to slowly recharge the bedrock aquifer. The storage
capacity in the bedrock is limited because the ground water
occurs along fractures and in joints. Water-supply wells are
often completed in both the regolith and in the bedrock.
Well yields in this region are extremely variable; bedrock
wells that intersect fractures and/or have sufficient recharge
from the overlying regolith are the most productive. A higher
density of fractures typically occurs along valleys and in draws
bordering ridges.
Northeast and Superior Uplands —
The Northeast and Superior Uplands cover two geographic
areas: 1) the Northeast includes the Adirondack Mountains and
most of New England, and 2) the Superior Uplands include
most of northern Minnesota and Wisconsin. Both areas are
underlain by Precambrian to Paleozoic-age igneous and meta-
morphic rocks that have been intruded by younger igneous
rocks and have been extensively folded and faulted (Figures
lOaandlOb).
The bedrock is overlain by unconsolidated glacial deposits
that vary in thickness. These glacial deposits include poorly-
sorted glacial tills, glacial lake clays, and well-sorted sands and
gravels laid down by mekwater streams. The glacial sands and
gravels serve as important aquifers and are capable of produc-
ing moderate to large yields. Ground water in the bedrock is
typically found in fractures or joints and the rock has a low
storage capacity. The glacial deposits provide recharge by slow
seepage to the underlying bedrock. Wells are often completed
in both bedrock and the glacial deposits to provide maximum
yields. Recharge to the glacial deposits occurs primarily from
precipitation.
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain —
The Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain region extends south-
ward from Cape Cod to the Rio Grande River in Texas. The
region is underlain by Jurassic to Recent-age semi-consolidated
to unconsolidated deposits of sand, silt and clay laid down by
streams draining the adjacent upland areas. These deposits are
very thin toward the inner edge of the region and thicken
southward and eastward. The thickest deposits occur in a down-
warped zone termed the Mississippi Embayment. All deposits
either dip toward the coast or toward the axis of the embayment;
therefore, the older formations outcrop along the inner part of
the region and the youngest outcrop along the gulf coastal area.
Coarser-grained material is more abundant updip, and clay and
silt layers tend to thicken downdip (Figures 1 la and 1 Ib).
Limestone and shell beds also occur in some areas and serve as
productive and important aquifers.
Figure 10a. Location of the Northeast and Superior Uplands
region (Heath, 1984).
Figure 1 la. Location of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain
region (Heath, 1984).
Terraces
dl Fresh Water ES3 Salty Water
(b)
Figure 10b. Topographic and geologic features of the Northeast Figure 1 Ib. Topographic and geologic features of the Gulf
and Superior Uplands region (Heath, 1984). Coastal Plain (Heath, 1984).
15
-------
Recharge to the aquifer occurs in outcrop areas from
precipitation and from infiltration along streams and rivers. In
some areas an increase downdip in the percentage of clay in the
deposits limits recharge and affects ground-water flow paths.
Ground-water withdrawals in these areas sometimes exceed
recharge to the aquifer and result in declining water levels and
land subsidence.
Southeast Coastal Plain —
The Southeast Coastal Plain includes all of Florida and the
southern parts of Alabama and Georgia. The surficial deposits
in this area are comprised of unconsolidated Pleistocene-age
sand, gravel, silt and shell beds. The semi-consolidated lime-
stone beds of the Biscayne aquifer outcrop in southern Florida.
Throughout much of the region, surficial deposits are underlain
by the Hawthorn formation, a Miocene-age clay and silt layer.
The Hawthorn formation often serves as a confining layer. The
Hawthorn formation overlies a thick sequence of semi-consoli-
dated to consolidated limestones and dolomites known as the
Floridan aquifer (Figures 12a and 12b).
The Floridan aquifer is one of the most productive aquifers
in the United States and is the principal ground-water resource
for the entire region. In the northern part of the region, the
Floridan is unconfined. Most recharge to the aquifer occurs
from direct infiltration of precipitation in this area. In central
and southern Florida, the aquifer is semi-confined by the
Hawthorn formation and recharge from the surface is limited.
Natural discharge from the Floridan occurs from springs and
streams and from seepage through confining beds. Many springs
with high discharge rates can be found where the Floridan
outcrops.
In southern Florida, water in the Floridan is typically
saline. In this area, water supplies are developed in the shal-
lower Biscayne aquifer. The Biscayne is unconfined and is
recharged directly by precipitation and by infiltration from
streams and impoundments.
The surficial sands and gravels also serve as aquifers in
many parts of the region, particularly where the Floridan is
saline. These aquifers supply small to moderate yields to wells
and are recharged by infiltration of precipitation.
Alluvial Valleys —
The Alluvial Valleys region encompasses the thick sand
and gravel deposits laid down by streams and rivers. Figure 13a
illustrates the extent and location of these major alluvial valleys.
Alluvial valleys typically contain extensive deposits of sands
and gravels that are often interbedded with overbank deposits
of silts and clays. The origin of many of the alluvial aquifers is
related to Pleistocene continental and alpine glaciation. Sedi-
ment-laden meltwater from the glaciers deposited extensive
sands and gravels in many stream valleys. These permeable
sands and gravels are capable of yielding moderate to large
water supplies to wells. These aquifers are typically confined to
the boundaries of the flood plain and to adjacent terraces
(Figure 13b).
In many of the alluvial valleys, ground-water systems and
surface water systems are hydraulically interconnected. Re-
charge to the aquifer occurs from streams and from precipita-
tion. Withdrawals of ground water near a stream may cause a
reversal of hydraulic gradients; ground water previously flow-
ing from the aquifer and discharging to the stream may now
receive recharge from the stream by induced infiltration.
Hawaiian Islands —
The Hawaiian Islands were formed by volcanic eruptions
of lava. These shield volcanoes rise from the ocean floor and
form the eight major Hawaiian islands. Erosion of the volcanoes
has carved distinctive valleys and has created an adjacent
narrow coastal plain.
The islands are formed from hundreds of separate lava
flows composed primarily of basalt. The lavas that were extruded
beneath the sea are relatively impermeable. Lavas that were
extruded above sea level contain permeable interflow zones,
lava tubes and cracks and joints formed while the lava cooled.
Lava flows in the valleys are often covered by a thin layer of
alluvium eroded from the basalt.
The mode of deposition of the basalt largely controls the
occurrence and flow of ground water on the islands. The
ground-water system consists of three major parts: 1) dike-
impounded water, 2) basal ground water, and 3) perched
Discharge
-Recharge Area 1— Area-*
Figure 12a. Location of the Southeaat Coastal Plain Region.
(b)
Figure 12b. Topographic and geologic features of the Southeast
Coastal Plain (Heath, 1984).
16
-------
^<\ - ^ -J -'.5;
r? - -.•£.•• -' _.-7..T.Mi-Aii^>
j: r, £? - ^>"Xv>;;u^v
" ,: - ~'P^-- -.' -e—Natural^:
Figure 13a. Location of the Alluvial Valley a ground-water region
(Heath, 1984).
(fresh) water (Figure 14). Dike-impounded water is found in the
joints developed along the vertical fissures through which the
lava erupted. Basal ground water is found in the permeable
zones of the horizontal lava flows extending from the eruption
centers and is partially hydraulically interconnected to the dike-
impounded water. The perched (fresh) water system is found in
permeable lava or alluvial deposits above thick impermeable
lava flows or basal ground water.
Recharge to these aquifers occurs through the infiltration
of precipitation. Because the volcanic soils are highly perme-
able, approximately thirty percent of the precipitation infil-
trates and recharges the aquifer.
The basal ground-water system is the principal source of
water to the islands. The basal system occurs as a fresh-water
lens floating on the denser sea water. Basal and dike-im-
pounded ground water is often withdrawn from horizontal
Explanation
Gravel
Sand
Silt and Clay
B Limestone
Figure 13b. Topographic and geologic features of a section of
the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River
(Heath, 1984).
tunnels and vertical and inclined wells constructed into the lava
flows.
Alaska —
Alaska can be divided into four physiographic divisions
from south to north: 1) the Pacific Mountain System, 2) the
Intermontane Plateaus, 3) the Rocky Mountain System and 4)
the Arctic Coastal Plain. The mountain ranges are comprised of
Precambrian to Mesozoic-age igneous and metamorphic rocks.
These are overlain by younger sedimentary and volcanic rocks.
Much of the region is overlain by unconsolidated deposits of
gravel, sand, silt clay and glacial till (Figure 15).
Climate directly affects the hydrology of Alaska. Much of
the water at the surface and in the subsurface is frozen through-
out much of the year, forming a zone of permafrost or perenni-
ally frozen ground. Permafrost occurs throughout the state
Lava Flows
Dikes
Dike Spring
I I Fresh Water
I I Salty Water
Gravel
Glacial Till
I I Water
I I Permafrost
Figure 14. Topographic and geologic features of an Hawaiian F'9ure 15- T°P°g™l*£ "nd 9eol°9ic features of parts of Alaska
Island (Heath, 1984). -
n
-------
except along the southern and southeastern coasts. The depth of
permafrost varies, but is typically deeper in the northern areas
and becomes shallower toward the south.
In zones of continuous permafrost, ground water occurs
beneath the permafrost and in isolated zones beneath deeper
lakes and alluvial channels. In zones of discontinuous perma-
frost, ground water occurs below the permafrost and in sand and
gravel deposits in major alluvial valleys. In the areas where
permafrost is absent, ground water occurs both in the bedrock
and in the overlying unconsolidated deposits.
Recharge to the aquifers is limited due to permafrost. Even
in non-permafrost areas, shallow groundwater is usually frozen
when spring runoff occurs. Most recharge to the aquifers occurs
from stream infiltration as the streams flow across the alluvial
deposits when permafrost is absent.
Site-Specific Geologic and Hydrogeologic
Conditions
The geologic and hydrogeologic conditions at a specific
site influence the selection of an appropriate well design and
drilling method. Prior to the installation of monitoring wells,
exploratory borings and related subsurface tests must usually be
made to define the geology beneath the site and to assess
ground-water flow paths and velocity. Formation samples and
other data collected from this work are needed to define the
hydraulic characteristics of the underlying materials. The logs
of these borings are used to correlate stratigraphic units across
the site. An understanding of the stratigraphy, including the
horizontal continuity and vertical thickness of formations be-
neath the site, is necessary to identify zones of highly permeable
materials or features such as bedding planes, fractures or
solution channels. These zones will affect the direction of
ground-water flow and/or contaminant transport beneath the
site. Because the occurrence and movement of groundwater in
the subsurface are closely related to the geology, the geologic
conditions at the site influence the location, design and methods
used to install monitoring wells.
The required depth of a monitoring well is determined by
the depth to one or more water-bearing formations that need to
be monitored. Where two or more saturated zones occur beneath
a site and the intent of the monitoring program is to monitor
water quality in the lower zone, the monitoring well may require
surface casing to "seal-off the upper water-bearing formation
prior to drilling deeper.
The formations at the site, whether consolidated or uncon-
solidated, also influence the type of well completion. In un-
consolidated deposits, screened intakes are typically designed.
The well may have either a naturally developed or artificially-
emplaced filter pack, depending on the grain-size distribution
of the water-bearing materials. Artificial filter packs and
screened intakes are also often required in poorly-consolidated
formations to minimize potential caving of the borehole and/or
to reduce turbidity in water samples collected from the completed
well. In some consolidated formations, the well may be com-
pleted as a cased borehole with no screen intake or filter pack.
Where conduit-born fines are a problem in consolidated for-
mations, an artificial filter pack and a screen intake may be
required.
Drilling methods must be chosen based at least in part on
geologic considerations. Hard, consolidated formations restrict
or eliminate certain drilling methods. For example, in karstic
formations, cavernous openings create significant problems in
maintaining circulation and in protecting drilling equipment.
Unconsolidated deposits can also present severe limitations for
various drilling methods. Some drilling techniques cannot be
used where large boulders are present. Conversely, cohesive
geologic deposits and the resultant stability of the borehole may
expand drilling options. Variations in equipment, drilling
techniques and installation procedures may be necessary to
overcome specific limitations when using particular drilling
methods.
Consideration of the hydrogeology at the site is also
important when selecting a drilling method. The depth to which
the well must be drilled to monitor a selected water-bearing
zone may exceed the practical depths of a particular drilling
technique. In addition, certain saturated geologic materials,
under high hydrostatic pressures, may either 1) impose increased
frictional resistance (i.e. expanding clays) which limits the
practical depths reached by some drilling methods or 2) create
unstable borehole conditions (i.e. heaving sands) that may
preclude the use of some drilling methods for installation of the
monitoring well.
For a complete discussion of well drilling methods and a
matrix for selecting a drilling method based on the general
hydrogeologic conditions and well design requirements, the
reader is referred to Section 4, "Description and Selection of
Drilling Methods."
Facility Characteristics
Frequently the purpose of a monitoring, program is to
evaluate whether or not ground water is being contaminated
from a waste disposal practice or a commercial operation
associated with the handling and storage of hazardous materi-
als. In these instances, the design and construction of the
monitoring wells must take into account the type of facility
being monitored and the fate and transport in the subsurface of
the waste materials or commercial products.
Recognition of the type of facility being monitored is
necessary to determine whether the facility is regulated under
existing federal and/or stage statutes and administrative rules
(see Section 1). Some regulated facilities must comply with
specific ground-water monitoring requirements, and program-
specific guidance documents may describe the design and
construction of the monitoring wells. The type of facility or
operation may also determine the types of materials and poten-
tial contaminants which have been handled onsite, past or
present, and whether or not those contaminants were stored or
disposed of on or below the ground surface. The design of the
facility may also include a system for waste or product con-
tainment that impacts potential release of contaminants, both
onsite and offsite, and may require separate monitoring.
The physical and chemical characteristics of the contami-
nants, including volatility, volubility in water and specific
density, influence the movement of the contaminant in the
subsurface. Additional factors that affect contaminant fate and
transport include: oxidation, sorption and biodegradation.
18
-------
Monitoring wells must be located and designed with these
environmental factors and contaminant characteristics in mind.
Construction materials for the well should be selected based on
their ability to withstand attack by contaminants that are antici-
pated at the site.
The following two-part discussion focuses on facility
characteristics that impact the design and construction of
monitoring wells. The first part presents the more prominent
types of waste disposal facilities or commercial operations for
which ground-water monitoring wells are designed. The second
part focuses on those physical and chemical characteristics of
contaminants that significantly influence the transport of the
contaminant in the subsurface.
Type of Facility
Landfills —
A landfill is a facility or waste unit where solid waste is
typically disposed of by spreading, compacting and covering
the waste. The landfill design, construction and operation
details vary depending on the physical conditions at the site and
the type and amount of solid waste to be disposed. Wastes are
usually emplaced and covered in one of three settings: 1) on and
above the natural ground surface where surface topography is
flat or gently rolling, 2) in valleys, ravines or other land
depressions, or 3) in trenches excavated into the subsurface.
The design of the landfill determines the boundaries of the fill
area and the lowest elevation at which the solid waste is
disposed. The physical dimensions of the landfill are important
criteria for locating and designing the depth of monitoring wells
used to monitor the quality of ground water in the first water-
bearing zone beneath the bottom of the landfill.
The wastes that are disposed of in landfills are generally
classified as either hazardous or non-hazardous. Wastes that are
characterized as hazardous are regulated in Title 40 of the
United States Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 261. The
distinction between a landfill receiving hazardous, waste versus
non-hazardous waste is important from a regulatory standpoint
when developing a ground-water monitoring program. Land-
fills receiving wastes classified as hazardous are subject to
minimum federal regulations for the design and operation of the
landfill (40 CFR, Parts 264 and 265, Subpart N and Part 268)
and for ground-water protection and monitoring (40 CFR, Parts
264 and 265, Subpart F). These regulations are mandated under
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and
subsequent amendments to RCRA. Individual states may be
authorized by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency to enforce the minimum federal regulations and may
adopt separate state regulations more stringent than the federal
standards.
Landfills receiving non-hazardous wastes are also regulated
under RCRA; however, these facilities are addressed under
different federal guidelines or recommendations for the design
and operation of sanitary landfills and for ground-water pro-
tection measures (40 CFR, Part 241, Subpart B). Properly
designed landfills should include a bottom liner of compacted,
low permeability soil and/or synthetic liner to minimize the
percolation of leachate from the landfill into the subsurface. A
leachate collection system should also be installed beneath the
landfill to control leachate migration and permit the collection
of leachate for final treatment and disposal. Hazardous waste
landfills are subject to minimum, federal technological guide-
lines for "composite double liner systems" (including com-
pacted low permeability soils and two flexible synthetic mem-
branes) that incorporate both primary and secondary leachate
collection systems. Many older or abandoned landfillls containing
both hazardous and/or non-hazardous wastes are unlined and
have been unregulated throughout the operational life of the
facility.
Ground-water monitoring programs at hazardous waste
land disposal facilities are also subject to federal requirements,
including performance criteria. The regulations require that a
sufficient number of wells be constructed at appropriate loca-
tions and depths to provide ground-water samples from the
uppermost aquifer. The purpose of ground-water monitoring is
to determine the impact of the hazardous waste facility on
ground water in the uppermost aquifer. This is done by compar-
ing representative samples of background water quality to
samples taken from the downgradient margins of the waste
management area. The ground- water monitoring wells must be
properly cased, completed with an artificial filter pack, where
necessary, and grouted so that representative ground-water
samples can recollected (40CFR, Sections 264.97 and 265.91).
Guidance for the design and construction of these monitoring
wells is provided in the RCRA Ground Water Monitoring
Technical Enforcement Guidance Document (TEGD). Owners
and operators should be prepared to provide evidence that
ground-water monitoring measures taken at concerned facili-
ties are adequate.
A potential monitoring problem at all landfills, particularly
older facilities, is the accurate location of the boundaries of the
landfill. If the boundaries of the fill area are unknown, monitor-
ing wells may not be accurately placed to properly define
subsurface conditions with respect to the actual location of the
disposal site. Accidental drilling into the landfill causes safety
and health concerns. All personnel involved in the drilling of
monitoring wells at hazardous waste treatment, storage and
disposal facilities, or in the direct supervision of such drilling,
should have received initial training in working in hazardous
environments in accordance with the regulations of the Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration (29 CFR, Section
1910.120).
Surface Impoundments —
Surface impoundments are used for the storage, treatment
and/or disposal of both hazardous and non-hazardous liquid
wastes. Impoundments or lagoons can be constructed either in
natural depressions or excavations or created by surface diking.
The impoundments typically are used to settle suspended
solids. Liquid wastes within the impoundment are usually
treated chemically to cause precipitation or coagulation of
wastes. Surface impoundments may be either "discharging" or
"non-discharging." Discharging impoundments are designed to
intentionally permit the supernatant fluid to overflow into
receiving streams for final treatment and disposal. Non-dis-
charging impoundments can either intentionally or uninten-
tionally lose liquids through seepage into the subsurface or
through evaporation.
The size of a surface impoundment can range from a
fraction of an acre to thousands of acres in surface area. The
19
-------
depths of these impoundments reportedly range from 2 feet to
more than 30 feet below the ground surface (Office of Technol-
ogy Assessment, 1984). The specific design and operation
requirements for surface impoundments that contain hazardous
materials are regulated under RCRA (40 CFR, Parts 264 and
265, Subpart K). To prevent waste infiltration, hazardous waste
impoundments are subject to minimum federal technological
guidelines for a "compacted soil double liner system" (includ-
ing compacted, low permeability soil and a single flexible
synthetic liner). A leachate collection system is also required to
contain any leachate that does infiltrate into the subsurface.
Hazardous waste impoundments are subject to the same
minimum federal ground-water protection and monitoring
regulations discussed above for hazardous waste landfills.
Water levels in monitoring wells located too close to im-
poundments often reflect the effects of mounding on the water
table and lead to inaccurate interpretation of the water-level
data (Beck, 1983). The design depth of the monitoring wells
also depends on the depth of the bottom of the surface im-
poundment below ground level and the depth of the first water-
bearing zone underlying the bottom of the impoundment.
Waste and Material Piles —
Large quantities of both wastes and materials may be
stockpiled for storage. Stockpiled material may include poten-
tially hazardous material such as highway deicing salts, copper,
iron, uranium and titanium ore, coal, gypsum and phosphate
rock. Hazardous waste piles can also be generated by other
industrial operations and vary in composition. Waste piles
typically include two types of mining wastes: 1) spoil piles and
2) tailings. Spoil piles are the overburden or waste rock removed
during either surface or underground mining operations. Tail-
ings are the solid wastes generated from the cleaning and
extraction of ores. Both types of mining waste include waste
rock that can contain potential contaminants such as uranium,
copper, iron, sulfur and phosphate. Waste piles containing
hazardous wastes are regulated under RCRA and are subject to
minimum federal design and operational requirements (40
CFR, Parts 264 and 265, SubpartL) and ground-water protection
requirements (40 CFR, Part 264, Subpart F), particularly where
the waste piles are unprotected from precipitation and surface
drainage. In many instances, waste and material piles remain
uncovered and exposed to the atmosphere. Precipitation per-
colating through the material can dissolve and leach potentially
hazardous constituents into the subsurface. For example, ground-
water quality problems have occurred due to the dissolution of
unprotected stockpiles of highway deicing salt. Cyanide leaching
to extract gold from mine tailings is potentially dangerous and
a widespread problem in some areas. Surface runoff from
stockpiles can also be a source of potential ground-water
contamination. Ground-water monitoring efforts in waste and
material pile areas need to be designed to detect or assess
ground-water contamination occurring on site and to determine
that surface runoff has not contaminated adjacent areas.
Land Treatment —
Land treatment involves the application of waste liquids
and sludges onto the ground surface for biological or chemical
degradation of the waste or for the beneficial use of nutrients
contained in the waste. Land treatment operations commonly
involve spray irrigation or land spreading of sludges on agricul-
tural, forested or reclaimed land. Municipal wastewater or
sludge application to agricultural land is the most common form
of land treatment. Industrial waste sludge includes effluent
treatment waste, stack scrubber residue, fly ash, bottom ash and
slag (Office of Technology Assessment, 1984). Control mea-
sures must be instituted to prevent surface runoff, wind erosion
and excessive percolation into the ground water during site
operation. The rate and duration of sludge application depends
on the waste, soil type and the level of anticipated degradation.
Wastes applied to the ground surface at a land treatment
facility may be hazardous or non-hazardous. Hazardous waste
land treatment facilities are regulated under RCRA and are
subject to minimum federal design and operational requirements
(40 CFR, Parts 264 and 265, Subpart M) and applicable reground-
water protection and monitoring requirements (40 CFR, Parts
264 and 265, Subpart F).
Underground Storage Tanks —
Underground storage tanks are used to store hazardous and
nonhazardous waste, industrial products and raw materials. The
primary industrial use for tanks is the storage of fuel oils. It is
estimated that half of all steel tanks in use store petroleum
products. Both steel and fiberglass tanks are also used to store
other products including solvents, acids and technical grade
chemicals.
Recent amendments to RCRA now specify design, main-
tenance and operation requirements for tanks containing haz-
ardous waste and commercial petroleum products (40 CFR,
Parts 264 and 265, Subpart J). These regulations include re-
quirements for a double liner system and/or cathodic protection
of steel tanks, leak detection and inventory control.
Radioactive Waste Disposal Sites —
Radioactive wastes are produced during the development
and generation of nuclear fuel and other radioactive materials.
Waste products include: 1) spent fuel from nuclear power plant
operations, 2) high-level radioactive waste from initial process-
ing of reactor fuels, 3) transuranic waste from fuel processing,
4) low-level wastes from power plants, weapons production,
research and commercial activities and 5) medical waste (Of-
fice of Technology Assessment, 1984).
The radioactive waste disposal method depends on the
radiation levels and the waste characteristics. Low-level ra-
dioactive wastes are usually disposed of in shallow burial sites.
High-level radioactive wastes are stored in specially constructed
facilities and may be reprocessed. Spent reactor fuels maybe '
stored on site or transferred to disposal facilities.
All radioactive waste disposal facilities are regulated by
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Ground-water monitor-
ing requirements for specific facilities coupled with the design
configuration of the facility directly affect the location and
installation of monitoring wells.
Waste Characteristics
The physical and chemical characteristics of the waste(s)
present at a site should be carefully evaluated and considered
together with site hydrogeology when designing a monitoring
program. The mechanisms that govern the fate and transport of
contaminants in the subsurface affect the occurrence and con-
20
-------
figuration of a contaminant plume. By considering these effects
a monitoring program can be designed to monitor or detect
subsurface contamination. The monitoring well locations, the
depth of the screened intervals, the method of well installation
and the appropriate construction materials must all be compat-
ible with the specific waste and hydrogeological characteristics
of the site.
Two physical properties that affect transport and fate of a
compound in the subsurface are the relative volubility and
density of the contaminant. Based on these properties, con-
taminants can be classified into categories that subsequently
influence monitoring well design: 1) compounds that are pri-
marily miscible/soluble in groundwater and 2) compounds that
are relatively immiscible/insoluble in ground water. These
categories can be further subdivided based on the relative
density of the compound.
Primarily Miscible/Soluble Contaminants —
This category of contaminants exhibits a relatively high
volubility in water and typically is mobile in the subsurface.
Soluble contaminants can exhibit densities greater than, less
than or equal to water. In general, where the density of the
contaminant closely approximates that of water, the contami-
nant moves in the same direction and with the same velocity as
ground water.
The primary processes that affect dissolved contaminant
transport in porous media include advection and dispersion
(Freeze and Cherry, 1979; Anderson, 1984; Mackay et al.,
1985). Advection is the process by which solutes are trans-
ported by the motion of ground water flowing in response to
hydraulic gradient, where the gradient reflects the magnitude of
the driving force. Dispersion refers to the dispersal of con-
taminants as they move with the ground water. Dispersion
occurs by mechanical mixing and molecular diffusion. Seasonal
changes in gradient may affect lateral movement of a contaminant
more than dispersion. Interactions that cccur between the
contaminant and the porous media include retardation, sorption
(Freeze and Cherry, 1979; Cherry et al., 1984; Mabey and Mill,
1984; Mackay et al., 1985) and biodegradation (McCarty et al.,
1981; McCarty et al., 1984; Wilson et al., 1985). These
mechanisms can affect the rate of movement of a contaminant
plume or alter the chemistry within the plume.
The effects of contaminant density must also reconsidered
in waste characterization (Bear, 1972). Figure 16 illustrates the
migration of a high density, miscible contaminant in the sub-
surface. As shown, the contaminant sinks vertically through the
aquifer and accumulates on top of the lower permeability
boundary. The contaminant then moves in response to gravity
and follows the topography of the lower permeability bound-
ary, possibly in opposition to the direction of regional ground-
water flow. Because the contaminant is also soluble, the con-
taminant will concomitantly move in response to the processes
of advection and dispersion. Therefore, two or more zones of
different concentration may be present within the plume: 1) a
dense pool of contaminant at the bottom of the aquifer and 2) a
dissolved fraction that moves with the ground water. Because
the dense, pooled portion of the plume is also soluble, the
contaminants will continue to dissolve and migrate in response
o ground-water flow conditions. Ground-water monitoring
wells installed in the aquifer may more easily detect the dis-
solved portion of the plume unless a specific monitoring pro-
gram is devised for the dense phase of the plume. A knowledge
of subsurface topography, determined from a top-of-bedrock
map or overburden thickness maps and confined by surface
geophysics and/or borings assist in accurately locating and
monitoring the denser portion of the plume.
Figure 17 illustrates the migration of a low density, soluble
contaminant. The contaminant initially accumulates at the top
of the water table. Dissolution and dispersion of the contami-
nant occurs as the accumulated contaminant migrates with the
ground water. Continued dissolution of the contaminant causes
eventual dissipation of the plume. Monitoring for contaminants
with these characteristics is frequently most effective in the
shallow portion of the aquifer.
Contaminants with a density similar to water migrate in
response to advection and dispersion. Contaminants in this
category include inorganic constituents such as trace metals and
nonmetals. Because of the similarity of contaminant movement
to the ground-water movement, certain nonmetals, such as
chloride, are commonly used as tracers to estimate the bound-
Figure 16. Migration of a high density, miscible contaminant in
the subsurface.
Figure 17. Migration of a low density, soluble contaminant in
the subsurface.
21
-------
aries of contaminant plumes. The dissolved portion of certain
organic contaminant plumes can also have a density similar to
water and migrate with the ground water. Monitoring and
detection schemes for plumes of these contaminants must be
based on the calculated effects of advection, dispersion, chemi-
cal attenuation and subsurface hydrogeology.
Relatively Immiscible/Insoluble Contaminants —
In both the saturated and unsaturated zones, immiscible
compounds exist as either free liquids or as dissolved constituents
depending on the relative volubility of the contaminant. The
migration of dissolved constituents in the aqueous phase is
primarily governed by the processes of advection-dispersion
and biological/chemical attenuation (Schwamenbach and Giger,
1985). The distribution of free liquids is complexly interrelated
to capillary pressure, density (gravitational forces) and viscosity
(shear forces) (Kovski, 1984; Villaume, 1985). The relative
density of the contaminant affects the occurrence and movement
of the contaminant in the subsurface and must be considered
when locating monitoring wells and when determining the
interval(s) to be screened in the aquifer.
Figure 18 illustrates the migration of a low density, immis-
cible contaminant. The contaminant moves downward through
the vadose zone and accumulates at the top of the water table
and/or within the capillary fringe. A residual amount of fluid is
retained in the vadose zone in response to surfical and interstitial
forces (Kovski, 1984; Yaniga and Warburton, 1984). The
contaminant plume accumulates on the water table and typi-
cally elongates parallel to the direction of ground-water flow
(Gillham et al, 1983). The movement and accumulation of
immiscible hydrocarbons in the subsurface has been discussed
by Blake and Hall (1984 ), Kovski (1984), Yaniga and Warburton
(1984), and Hinchee and Reisinger (1985). Depending on the
physical properties of the contaminant, a volatile gas phase may
accumulate in the unsaturated zone.
Monitoring wells designed to detector assess low density
immiscible contaminants should be screened in the upper part
of the aquifer. In many instances the screen should span the
vadose zone and the upper portion of the aquifer to allow the
floating contaminant to enter the well. Many immiscible con-
taminants depress the water table in the well and create an
apparent free liquid thickness that is greater than the thickness
of the floating contaminant within the aquifer. Where volatiles
accumulate in the vadose zone, an explosion hazard may exist.
Various mapping and detection techniques including soil-gas
sampling and geophysical techniques can be utilized in plan-
ning the monitoring well locations to intercept the plume and
reduce the risk of an explosion (Noel et al., 1983; Andres and
Canace, 1984; Marrin and Thompson, 1984; Saunders and,
Germeroth, 1985; Lithland et al., 1985).
High density immiscible fluids are called dense non-
aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs). DNAPLs include most ha-
logenated hydrocarbons and other aliphatic compounds because
the density of most organic compounds is significantly greater
than water. A density difference of one percent or greater has
been shown to cause migration of contaminants in the subsurface
(Mackay et al., 1985).
Figure 19 illustrates the movement of DNAPLs in the
subsurface. Movement of DNAPLs in the unsaturated zone is
primarily governed by capillary forces and density (Villaume,
1985). The contaminant sinks through the aquifer and pools at
the bottom of the aquifer on top of the lower permeability
boundary (Schwille, 1981). The pool of contaminant migrates
in response to the topography of the lower permeability bound-
ary independent of regional ground-water flow. Residual ma-
terial is retained in the pore space of the unsaturated and
saturated zones. This residual typically occurs as discrete
fingers of globules. The formation and movement of the glob-
ules in the subsurface depends on the extant pore-size distribution
and capillary forces (Schwille, 1981; Villaume, 1985). As
much as five percent by volume of a compound maybe retained
in the aquifer after plume migration.
Both residual contaminant and the contaminant plume may
continue to contribute dissolved constituents to the ground
water for an extended period of time. Thus, small spills of
persistent compounds have the ability to extensively contami-
Low Density
Immiscible Liquid
Small Dissolved Plume
777 7 7777 7 7 7 7 7
Small Dissolved Plume
Dense, Immiscible Liquid
Figure 18. Migration of a low density, immiscible contaminant in Figure 19. Migration of a dense, non-aqueous phase liquid
the subsurface. (DNAPL) in the subsurface.
22
-------
nate ground water. A vapor plume from the contaminant source
may also form and migrate in the vadose zone. These plumes
can often be detected through soil-gas sampling techniques.
Field investigation sat hazardous waste sites have supported
the phenomena of sinking DNAPLs as demonstrated by Schwille
(1981) in physical model experiments (Guswa, 1984; Reinhard
et al, 1984; Villaume, 1985). Monitoring for these DNAPLs
poses special problems. The actual contaminant plume may
migrate independently of regional ground-water flow and may
be very difficult to locate. Analysis of maps of aquifer thickness
and bedrock topography will aid in determining potential
migration pathways. The dissolved constituents will migrate
according to the ground-water flow regime. Vapor plumes can
be detected by using soil-gas sampling techniques.
Villaume (1985) indicates that monitoring well installation
through DNAPL-contaminated zones should proceed with
caution to avoid cross contamination. Where the borehole is
open during drilling or where the annulus is not properly sealed,
DNAPLs may migrate down the hole or annulus and cause cross
contamination.
Other Anthropogenic Influences
The hydrogeology of a site and the characteristics of the
facility are primary factors that should be assessed when
choosing specifications for a monitoring well program. How-
ever, a variety of factors that relate to the activities of man also
should be assessed to determine any potential impacts to the
monitoring program. These factors can affect ground-water
gradients and flow direction and might have had past impacts on
ground-water quality that will affect a current monitoring
program.
To minimize the possibility of unknown anthropogenic
influences, any initial investigation should include a detailed
review of the site history. This review should encompass a
study of an y land use prior to the current or proposed activity at
the site. Additionally, a design and operational history for any
existing operation also should be compiled that includes the
location of all site activities and the type(s) of waste accepted
during the operation of the disposal facility. For example,
information about tank age, volume of product delivered and
sold, location of the tank and similar information is needed to
assess a gasoline-dispensing cooperation. Another example is
where a presently regulated disposal facility is located on the
site of a previously unregulated landfill or a turn-of-the-century
industrial facility. Prior waste disposal practices may already
have caused ground-water contamination. Knowledge of the
past site practices might lead the investigator to the conclusion
that contaminants are held in the vadose zone and could be
periodical] y released to the ground-water during recharge events
(Pettyjohn, 1976 and 1982). Cyclic fluctuations in ground-
water quality are sometimes difficult to evaluate because natu-
rally-occurring constituents in the vadose zone can also cause
similar fluctuations. Additional sources of data to assess site
history include: 1) historical photographs, 2) air photos, 3)
zoning plats, 4) interviews with local citizens and 5) local
newspapers.
A complete site assessment must frequently include an
investigation outside the legal boundary of the property, An
evaluation of past and present land use practices in the area to
be monitored can alert the investigator to potential contamination
problems not related to the activity to be monitored. For
example, non-point sources such as agricultural practices may
affect natural background water quality. Adjacent industrial or
commercial facilities may also influence background water
quality or may serve as a source of contamination.
Pumping or injection wells near an area to be monitored
can affect ground- water flow direction and velocity and/or can
influence ground-water quality. The presence of a well or
collection of wells with resultant cones of depression or
impression might reverse anticipated ground-water flow direc-
tions or alter the rate of migration of contaminant plumes. The
influence of a pumping well(s) should be determined before
completing final design of the monitoring program. Collection
of water-level measurements and evaluation of pump test data
and velocity plots can be used to determine the possible hydrau-
lic effects of the other wells in the monitoring program (Keely
and Tsang, 1983). A more detailed discussion of monitoring
strategies that are useful near well fields can be found in Keely
(1986). Potential water-quality effects from injection wells
near the site must also be evaluated.
Other activities that can alter ground-water velocity and/or
direction include infiltration galleries and ground-water re-
charge facilities. Mounding of the water table beneath these
areas will locally affect ground-water gradients. Where the
quality of the recharge water differs from background water
quality, the ground-water quality in the area may also be
affected.
Storm sewers, surface runoff catchments, sanitary sewers,
buried underground cables, underground pipelines or other
subsurface disturbances may affect ground-water flow paths
and ground-water quality. Preferential flow paths can be cre-
ated when subsurface trenches or excavations are refilled with
unconsolidated backfill and bedding materials. These more
permeable materials provide conduits that can influence or
control the flow of contaminants in the subsurface and can also
serve as a vapor migration pathway. Storm and sanitary sewer
lines and other buried pipelines may be a source of contamina-
tion if leakage occurs. The precise location of buried pipelines
and cables should be determined to avoid inadvertently drilling
into or through the lines. For example, drilling into natural gas
pipelines poses an immediate health and safety risk to anyone
near the drilling site. Drilling into pipelines for sanitary or storm
sewers poses less of a safety risk, but may exacerbate the
contamination problem. In summary, a review of all site activi-
ties and subsurface structures serves to contribute valuable
information to the monitoring program.
Equipment that the Well Must Accommodate
The purpose of a monitoring well is to provide access to a
specific zone from which water-level measurements and/or
ground-water quality samples, representative of the extant
water quality in the monitored zone, can be obtained. These
conditions and the size of equipment necessary to obtain the
desired measurements or collect the desired samples will de-
termine the diameter of the well that must be drilled. For
example, if the transmissivity of the monitored zone is to be
23
-------
evaluated, then the well diameter must accommodate a pump or
other device capable of providing the necessary water demand
to make the transmissivity determination. Similarly, if repre-
sentative ground-water quality samples are to be collected from
the well, then an appropriate well diameter must be selected that
accommodates the needed sampling equipment. Equipment
and procedures that influence the choice of a well diameter
include: 1) borehole geophysical tools and downhole cameras,
2) water-level measuring devices, 3) ground-water sampling
devices and 4) aquifer testing procedures.
Borehole Geophysical Tools and Downhole
Cameras
Use and Limitations of Borehole Geophysical Tools —
Borehole geophysical methods are often used in monitor-
ing wells to obtain hydrogeologic information. Under appropriate
conditions, porosity, hydraulic conductivity, pore fluid electrical
conductivity and general stratigraphic logs can be obtained.
Unfortunately, borehole geophysical methods are frequently
limited by the materials and the drilling and completion meth-
ods used to construct the well. If it is anticipated that borehole
geophysical methods will be conducted in a well, it is neces-
sary to consider the limitations that are imposed by the various
methods and materials that are used to construct the well.
Virtually all borehole methods that are likely to be used in
shallow ground-water investigations can be conducted in a 2-
inch diameter well. Four things that commonly restrict the use
of borehole methods are well fluid, casing type, perforation
type and gravel pack. Each one of these imposes limitations on
the geophysical methods that can be conducted in the well. A
summary of the limitations is presented in Table 3, and the
limitations are discussed below.
Some geophysical methods require that a fluid be present
in the well. Sonic tools will not operate in an air-filled borehole
because the acoustic source and receivers are not coupled to the
formation. Television systems can operate in air or fluid, but
only if the fluid is not murky. Radiometric methods, such as
natural gamma, gamma density or neutron moisture logs can
operate in air or fluid-filled wells. However, the calibration of
these tools is different between air and fluid-filled wells.
Standard Resistivity tools that measure the electrical con-
ductivity of the formation will not operate in air-filled bore-
holes because of the lack of an electrical connection between
the electrodes and the connation. Some individuals have modified
Resistivity tools to operate in air-filled boreholes by altering the
electrode design to insure that the electrode is always in contact
with the formation. If the well fluid electrical conductivity y is
two orders of magnitude or more greater than the formation
electrical conductivity (electrical conductivity is the reciprocal
of electrical Resistivity), then the lateral and normal electrical
Resistivity tools cannot be used because the well fluid distorts
the electric field to such a degree that it cannot be corrected.
This situation can occur in low porosity formations. The induction
log, which measures formation electrical conductivity by
electromagnetic coupling, does not require fluid in the well to
operate and is usually not affected by the well fluid.
The casing material also influences which methods can be
used. No measurement of the electrical properties of the for-
mation can be made if the well is cased with metal. Quantitative
Resistivity measurements can only be made in open boreholes;
limited qualitative measurements can be made in perforated
PVC or perforated teflon wells. The formation electrical con-
ductivity can be measured qualitatively with induction logs in
wells cased with PVC or teflon. Sonic methods have not been
demonstrated to be useful in cased wells, although this is an area
that is currently being researched. The calibration of radiomet-
ric logs is affected by the thickness and material used in the
casing. This is particularly true when neutron moisture methods
are used in PVC casing because the method is unable to
distinguish hydrogen in the PVC from hydrogen in the pore
fluid.
The type of perforations influence which methods can be
used. Qualitative Resistivity measurements can be made in non-
metallic wells that are uniformly perforated, but not in wells that
Table 3. Use and Limitations of Borehole Geophysical Tools (K. Taylor, Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada, Personal
Communication, 1988)
Borehole Method
Sonic
Resistivity
Induction
Natural Gamma
Gamma Density
Neutron
Caliper
TV
Borehole Fluid
Fluid Resistivity
Vertical Flow
Horizontal Flow
Air
4
4
1
2
2
2
.- 1
1
4
4
4
Fluid
Water
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
Open
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
Casino Material Perforations Radius of
Investigations
Metal Plastic Screen No Screen (cm) Comments
444
433
4 1
2 2
2 2
2 2
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
5-50
5-400
100-400
5-30
5-15
5-15
0
0
0
0
2-6cm
Big effect with PVC
Clear fluid only
Strongly influenced
by screen
1 Works, this well property does not adversely affect the log
2 Works, but calibration affected
3 Works qualitatively
4 Doesn't work
24
-------
are not perforated because there is no path for the current
between the electrodes and the formation. Vertical flow in the
well is controlled by the location of perforated intervals. Hence,
the location of perforations will dictate what intervals can be
investigated. Horizontal flow through the well is controlled by
the radial distribution of perforations. Attempts to measure the
horizontal flow must have perforations that are continuous
around the well.
In cased holes, the material in and the size of the annulus
between the casing and the undisturbed formation will influ-
ence geophysical measurements. This occurs because all bore-
hole geophysical measurements are a weighted average of the
property being investigated over a cylinder portion of the
formation adjacent to the borehole. The radius of this cylinder
is referred to as the radius of investigation. The radius of
investigation is a function of the geophysical method, tool
design, and, to a lesser degree, the formation and annular
material. Table 3 lists typical radii of investigation for common
borehole geophysical methods. Because it is generally the
formation, not the material in the disturbed zone, that is of
interest, it is important to ensure that the radius of investigation
is larger than the disturbed zone.
The radius of investigation for the sonic tool is on the order
of a few wavelengths of the sonic pulse. Hence, it is less for high
frequency tools (greater than 30 kHz) than for low frequency
tools (less than 20 kHz). The radius of investigation of Resistiv-
ity tools is controlled by the type of array that is used. Resistivity
tools with multiple radii of investigation can commonly be used
to correct for the effects of a disturbed annulus. The Radiomet-
ric logs have a very limited radius of investigation and usually
require a driven casing or open borehole to be accurate. The
spacing between the source and the detector influences the
radius of investigation. Some tools use two spacings to correct
for disturbed zones less than approximately 4 inches in radius.
Horizontal flow through the borehole is strongly affected by the
hydraulic conductivity of the material in the disturbed zone.
Hydraulic testing of discrete intervals with straddle packers is
adversely affected if the annular material adjacent to the pack-
ers has a hydraulic conductivity significantly greater than the
formation.
When using tools that have a radioactive source (gamma
density or neutron moisture), state regulations vary. Most states
severely restrict the use of these tools in water wells. At a
minimum, it is usually required that the measurements be made
in cased wells. This complicates the use of these tools because
the casing influences the calibration and creates a disturbed
zone. Another common restriction is that the well not be
perforated in an aquifer with potable water. This further limits
the use of these methods to areas that are already contaminated.
General Applications —
Natural gamma and self potential (SP) logs are commonly
used to detect lithologic boundaries and to identify formations
containing clays and shales (Keys, 1968; Keys and MacCary,
1971; Voytek, 1982; Mickam et al, 1984; Taylor et al, 1985).
Both natural gamma and SP logging tools can be accommo-
dated by 2-inch diameter or larger wells and are frequently
available in combination with other logging tools as a portable
unit that may be easily transported to sites with restricted
access.
Formation Porosity and density may be determined through
the use of neutron, sonic and gamma-gamma logs (Keys, 1968;
Keys and MacCary, 1971; Sengcr, 1985). The use of the neutron
tool is generally accepted as an indicator of moisture content
(Keys, 1968). Wilson (1980) and Everett et al. (1984) have
pointed out limitations in using the neutron tool inside plastic
casing, in the presence of certain contaminants and in certain
geologic settings. Tool detector sizes are limited to 2-inch
diameter wells or greater and are available as portable units for
remote field access.
Various types of caliper logs are used to maintain a con-
tinuous record of well or borehole diameter that can be used to
detect broken casings, the location of fractures, solution devel-
opment, washed-out horizons and hydrated clays (Keys and
MacCary, 1971; Mickam et al., 1984; DeLuca and Buckley,
1985). Diameters are "sensed" through the use of multiple
feeler arms or bow springs. Calipers are available for borehole
or well diameters ranging from 1.65 inches to 30 inches.
Other borehole logging tools may be used to derive in-
formation about the character of water in the borehole and the
formation. Induction tools are used to measure pore fluid
conductivity (Taylor et al., 1985). Selected Resistivity tools with
different formation penetration depths are used to detect
variations in pore fluids (Keys, 1968; Keys and MacCary, 197 1;
Kwader, 1985; Lindsey, 1985). Temperature logs have recently
been applied to the detection of anomalous fluid flow (Urban
and Diment, 1985). Induction, Resistivity and temperature log-
ging tools have been designed to fit 2-inch diameter or larger
monitoring wells.
Flowmeters are used to monitor fluid rates in cased or
uncased holes. This tool provides direct ground-water flow
measurement profiling. Flowmeters can also be used to detect
thief zones, lost circulation zones and the location of holes in
casing. Flowmeters measure flow using low inertia impellers or
through changes in thermal conductance as liquids pass through
the tool (Kerfoot, 1982). Many professionals remain
unconvinced, however, as to the effectiveness of Flowmeters.
Impeller Flowmeters are available as small as 1.65 inches in
diameter conductance Flowmeters are typically 1.75 inches in
diameter.
Some uncertainty exists in the application of almost all
borehole equipment including geophysical logs. The correct
interpretation of all such data often depends on precise knowledge
of geologic and hydrogeologic conditions that are frequently
not available. Therefore the interpretation of these data are
invariably subjective.
Downhole television cameras can be used to gather in-situ
information on boreholes and monitoring wells (Huber, 1982;
Morahan and Doorier, 1984). Television logging maybe used
to check monitoring well integrity (i.e., casing and screen
damage), to inspect installation and construction procedures
and to accurately characterize subsurface fractures and geologic
strata. Borehole television cameras have recently become
available for wells as small as 2 inches in diameter. Cameras are
available that provide multi-angle viewing, black/white or
color images and recorded depth data during imaging.
Many of the logging tools discussed in this section are
available as either combination probes or single probes. These
25
-------
tools have been designed so that they can be run from truck
mounted winches and loggers or from portable units that can be
transported by backpack to sites where vehicular access is
restricted. In addition, a variety of portable data loggers are
available to record logging data gathered onsite.
Water-Level Measuring Devices
The basic water-level measuring device is a steel tape
typically coated with ordinary carpenter's chalk. This is the
simplest water-level measuring device and is considered by
many to be the most accurate device at moderate depths. In
addition to a standard steel tape, the five main types of water-
level measuring devices are: 1) float-type, 2) pressure transduc-
ers, 3) acoustic probes, 4) electric sensors and 5) air lines. Float-
type devices rest on the water surface and may provide a
continuous record of water levels on drum pen recorders or data
loggers. Float sizes range from 1.6 inches to 6.0 inches in
diameter, but are only recommended for wells greater than 4
inches in diameter due to loss of sensitivity in smaller diameter
boreholes. Pressure transducers are suspended in the well on a
cable and measure height of water above the transducer center.
Transducers are available in diameters as small as 0.75 inches.
Acoustic well probes use the reflective properties of sound
waves to calculate the distance from the probe at the wellhead
to the water surface. Acoustic probes are designed for well
diameters as small as 4 inches and are limited to water depths
greater than 25 feet (Ritchey, 1986). Electric sensors are sus-
pended on the end of a marked cable. When the sensor encoun-
ters conductive fluid, the circuit is completed and an audible or
visual signal is displayed at the surface. Air lines are installed
at a known depth beneath the water and by measuring the
pressure of air necessary to discharge water from the tube, the
height of the water column above the discharge point can be
determined.
Steel tapes coated with a substance that changes color
when wetted are also used as water-level measuring devices
(Garber and Koopman, 1968). Tapes are available as small as
0.75 inches in width. Specially coated tape with physical and
chemical resistance has recently been developed that is 0.375
inches in width and contains electrical conductance probes at
the end of the tape to sense water levels (Sanders, 1984).
Ground-Water Sampling Devices
A wide variety of ground-water sampling devices are
available to meet the requirements of a ground-water monitori-
ng program. A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages
of sampling devices is provided by Barcelona et al. (1983) and
(1985a), Nielsen and Yeates (1985) and Bryden et al. (1986).
Bailers are the simplest of the sampling devices commonly
used for ground-water sampling. They can be constructed from
a variety of materials including polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE),
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and stainless steel. Diameters of 0.5
inches or larger are common. Because bailers are lowered by
hand or winch, the maximum sampling depth is limited by the
strength of the winch and the time required for bailing.
Grab samplers such as Kemmerer samplers can be used to
collect samples from discrete sampling depths. These samplers
can be constructed from a variety of materials and can be
manufactured to fit in wells with 0.5-inch diameter or larger.
Syringe samplers allow for depth discrete sampling at
unlimited depths while reducing effects on sample integrity
(Nielsen and Yeates, 1985). Syringe samplers have been con-
structed from stainless steel, PTFE and polyethylene/glass with
various modifications (Gillham, 1982). These samplers maybe
utilized in wells with a casing diameter 1.5 inches or larger.
Suction lift or vacuum pumps include both centrifugal and
peristaltic pumps. These types of pumps are limited to sampling
depths of less than 25 feet. However, they can be utilized in
wells of 0, S-inch diameter or larger.
Gas drive samplers can be used in wells with a casing
diameter of 0.75 inches or larger. These samplers operate on the
principal of applied gas pressure to open/close check valves and
deliver samples to the surface (Robin et al., 1982; Norman,
1986). Sampling depth is limited by the internal working
strength of the tubing used in sampler construction,
Positive displacement bladder pumps can be constructed
of various inert materials for wells with a diameter of 1.5 inches
or larger. The use of pressurized bladders ensures that the
sample does not contact the driving gas. Most bladder pumps
are capable of lifting samples from 300 to 400 feet, although
models capable of 1000 feet of lift have been recently advertised.
Both gear-drive and helical rotor submersible pumps have
been developed for wells with a casing diameter of at least 2
inches. These pumps are capable of lifts of up to at least 150 feet.
Submersible gas-driven piston pumps have been developed that
operate on compressed air or bottled gas without contact of the
sample with the air. These pumps are available for 1.5 and 2-
inch diameter monitoring wells and have pumping lifts from 0
to 1000 feet. All of these types of pumps can' be constructed
from various inert materials and may provide continuous, but
variable flow rates to minimize degassing of the sample.
Aquifer Testing Procedures
The diameter, location, depth, and screened interval of a
monitoring well should be chosen based on the need for and the
type of aquifer testing procedures that will be performed on the
well. Observation wells generally do not have to be designed
with the same diameter criteria in mind. The type of aquifer
testing procedure should be based on the hydraulic character-
istics of the aquifer such as transmissivity, storage coefficient,
homogeneity and areal extent.
Pumping tests are typically performed in wells with a high
transmissivity and in wells with a diameter large enough to
accommodate the pumping equipment. Conversely, slug in-
jection or recovery tests, that add or remove smaller amounts of
water, are typically performed in formations with low trans-
missivity and in smaller diameter wells. Packer tests can be
conducted in wells as small as 2 inches in diameter, but the
optimum well diameter for packer testing is 4 inches. Bailer
tests to evaluate aquifer characteristics can be performed in
wells of all diameters. Tracer tests are also used to evaluate
aquifer characteristics and can be performed regardless of well
diameter.
26
-------
References
Anderson, M.P., 1984. Movement of contaminants in ground
water: ground water transport-advection and dispersion;
Ground-Water Contamination, Studies in Geophysics;
National Academy Press, Washington, B.C., 179 pp.
Andres, K.G. and R. Canace, 1984. Use of the electrical
Resistivity technique to delineate a hydrocarbon spill in the
coastal plain deposits of New Jersey; Proceedings of the
NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and
Organic Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection
and Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 188-197.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich and E.E. Garske,
1985a. Practical guide for ground-water sampling; Illinois
State Water Survey, SWS Contract Report 374, Champaign
Illinois, 93 pp.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb and R. Miller, 1983. A guide to the
selection of materials for monitoring well construction and
ground-water sampling; Illinois State Water Survey, SWS
Contract Report 327, Champaign, Illinois, 78 pp.
Bear, J., 1972. Dynamics of fluids in porous media Elsevier,
New York, 764 pp.
Beck, B.F., 1983. A common pitfall in the design of RCRA
mound-water monitoring programs; Ground Water, vol.
21, no. 4, pp. 488-489.
Blake, S.B. and R.A. Hall, 1984. Monitoring petroleum spills
with wells: some problems and solutions; Proceedings of
the Fourth National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration
and Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 305-310.
Bryden, G.W., W.R. Mabey and K.M. Robme, 1986. Sampling
for toxic contaminants in ground water Ground-Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 67-72.
Cherry, J. A.,R. W. Gillham and J.F. Barker, 1984. Contaminants
in ground water chemical processes; Ground-Water
Contamination, Studies in Geophysics; National Academy
Press, Washington, D.C., 179 pp.
Deluca, R.J. and B.K. Buckley, 1985. Borehole logging to
delineate fractures in a contaminated bedrock aquifer;
Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water
Investigations; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 387-397.
Everett, L.G., L.G. Wilson and E.W. Hoylman, 1984. Vadose
zone monitoring for hazardous waste sites; Noyes Data
Corporation, Park Ridge, New Jersey, 360 pp.
Freeze, R. A. and J.A. Cherry, 1979. Ground Water; Prentice-
Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 604 pp.
Garber, M.S. and F.C. Koopman, 1968. Methods of measuring
water levels in deep wells; Techniques of Water-Resources
Investigations of the United States Geological Survey,
Book 8, Instrumentation; United States Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 23 pp.
Gillham, R. W., 1982. Syringe devices for ground-water
sampling; Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 2, no. 2,
pp. pp. 36-39.
Gillham, R. W., M.J.L. Robin, J,F. Barker and J.A. Cherry,
1983. Ground-water monitoring and sample bias; API
Publication 4367, Environmental Affairs Department,
American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D. C., 206 pp.
-Guswa, J. PL 1984. Application of multi-phase flow theory at "
chemical waste" 'landfill, Niagara Falls, New York;
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on
Ground-Water Quality Research; Oklahoma State
University Printing Services, Stillwater, Oklahoma, pp.
108-111.
Heath, R. C., 1984. Ground-water regions of the United States;
United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper
2242; Superintendent of Documents, United States
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 78 pp.
Hinchee, R.E. and H.J. Reisinger, 1985. Multi-phase transport
of petroleum hydrocarbons in the subsurface environment:
theory and practical application; Proceedings of the
NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and
Organic Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection
and 'Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 58-76.
Huber, W.F., 1982. The use of downhole television in monit-
oring applications; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water
Monitoring; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 285-286.
Keely, J. F., 1986. Ground-water contamination assessments;
Ph.D. dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater,
Oklahoma, 408 pp.
Keely, J.F. and C.F. Tsang, 1983. Velocity plots and capture
zones of pumping centers for ground-water investigations;
Ground Water, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 701-714.
Kerfoot, W.B., 1982. Comparison of 2-D and 3-D ground-
water flowmeter probes in fully penetrating monitoring
wells; Proceedings of the Second National Symposium on
Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 264-
268.
Keys, W .S., 1968. Well logging in ground-water hydrology;
Ground Water, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 10-18.
Keys, W .S. and L.M. MacCary, 1971. Application of borehole
geophysics to water-resources investigations, Book 2;
United States Department of the Interior, Washington,
D.C., 126 pp.
Kovski, J.R., 1984. Physical transport process for hydrocarbons
in the subsurface; Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Ground Water Quality Research; Oklahoma
State University Printing Services, Stillwater, Oklahoma,
pp. 127-128.
Kwader, T., 1985. Resistivity-porosity cross plots for
determining in situ formation water-quality case examples;
Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water
Investigations; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 415-424.
Lindsey, G. P., 1985. Dry hole resistivity logging; Proceedings
of the NWWA Conference on Surface and Borehole
Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water Investigations;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 371-
376.
Lithland, S.T., T.W. Hoskms and R.L. Boggess, 1985, A new
ground-water survey tool: the combined conepenetrometer/
vadose zone vapor probe; Proceedings of the NWWAI
API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic
Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection and
Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 322-330.
27
-------
Mabey, W.R. and T. Mill, 1984. Chemical transformation in
ground water Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Ground-Water Quality Research Oklahoma
State University Printing Services, Stillwater, Oklahoma,
pp. 61-64.
Mackay, D.M., P.V. Roberts and J.A. Cherry, 1985. Transport
of organic contaminants in ground water; Environmental
Science & Technology, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 384-392.
tin, D.L. and G.M. Thompson, 1984. Remote detection of
volatile organic contaminants in ground water via shallow
soil gas sampling; Proceedings of the NWWA/API
Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic
Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection and
Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 172-187.
McCarty, P.L., M. Reinhard and BE. Rittmann, 1981. Trace
organics in ground water; Environmental Science &
Technology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 40-51.
McCarty, P. L, B.E. Rittman and E.J. Bouwer, 1984.
Microbiological processes affecting chemical
transformation in ground water Ground-Water Pollution
Microbiology, G. Bitton and C.D. Gerba, editors, Wiley
and Sons, New York, pp. 90-115.
Mickam, J.T., B.S. Levy and G.W. Lee, 1984. Surface and
borehole geophysical methods in ground water
investigations; Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4,
no. 4, pp. 167-171.
Morahan, T. and R.C. Doorier, 1984. The application of
television borehole logging to ground-water monitoring
programs; Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4, no.
4, pp. 172-175.
Nielsen, D.M. and G.L. Yeates, 1985. A comparison of sampling
mechanisms available for small-diameter ground-water
monitoring wells; Proceedings of the Fifth National
Symposium and Exposition on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 237-270.
Noel, M. R., R.C. Benson and P.M. Beam, 1983. Advances in
mapping organic contamination: alternative solutions to a
complex problem; National Conference on Managing
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Washington, D.C.;
Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, Silver
Spring, Maryland, pp. 71-75.
Norman, W.R., 1986. An effective and inexpensive gas-drive
ground-water sampling device; Ground-Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 56-60.
Office of Technology Assessment, 1984. Protecting the nation's
ground water from contamination, vols. I and II; United
States Congress, Washington, D. C., 503 pp.
Pettyjohn, W.A., 1976. Monitoring cyclic fluctuations in ground-
water quality; Ground Water, vol. 14, no. 6. pp. 472-479,
Pettyjohn, W. A., 1982; Cause and effect of cyclic changes in
ground-water quality; Ground-Water Monitoring Review,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 43-49.
Reinhard, M., J.W. Graydom, N.L. Goodman and J.F. Barker,
1984. The distribution of selected trace organics in the
leachate plume of a municipal landfill; Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Ground-Water Quality
Research; Oklahoma State University Printing Services,
Stillwater, Oklahoma, pp. 69-71.
Ritchey, J. D., 1986. Electronic sensing device used for in situ
ground-water monitoring; Ground-Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 108-113.
Robin, MJ., D.J. Dytynshyn and S.J. Sweeny, 1982. Two gas-
drive sampling devices; Ground-Water Monitoring Review,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 63-65.
Sanders, P.J., 1984. New tape for ground-water measurement;
Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4,no. l,pp. 39-42.
Saunders, W.R. and R.M. Germeroth, 1985. Electromagnetic
measurements for subsurface hydrocarbon investigations;
Proceedings of the NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum
Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water
Prevention, Detection and Restoration; National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 310-321.
Schwarzenbach, R.P. and W. Giger, 1985. Behavior and fate of
halogenated hydrocarbons in groundwater; Ground-Water
Quality, C.H. Ward, W. Giger and P.L. McCarty, editors;
Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 446-471.
Schwille, F., 1981. Ground-water pollution in porous media by
fluids immiscible with water ,Quality of Ground Water,
Proceedings of an International Symposium,
Noordwijkeshout, The Netherlands; Studies in
Environmental Science, vol. 17, Elsevier Scientific
Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1128 pp.
Senger, J.A., 1985. Defining glacial stratigraphy with the
neutron log; Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on
Surface and Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-
Water Investigations; National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 355-368.
Taylor, K.C., S.G. Wheatcraft and L.G. McMilhon, 1985. A
strategy for hydrologic interpretation of well logs;
Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water
Investigations; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 314-323.
Urban, T.C. and W.H. Diment, 1985. Convection in boreholes:
limits on interpretation of temperature logs and methods
for determining anomalous fluid flow; Proceedings of the
NWWA Conference on Surface and Borehole Geophysical
Methods in Ground-Water Investigations; National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 399-414.
Villaume, J,F., 1985. Investigations at sites contaminated with
dense, non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs); Ground-
Water Monitoring Review, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 60-74.
Voytek, J. Jr., 1982. Application of downhole geophysical
methods in ground-water monitoring; Proceedings of the
Second National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 276-278.
Wilson, J. T., M.J. Noonan and J.F. McNabb, 1985.
Biodegradation of contaminants in the subsurface; Ground-
Water Quality, C.H. Ward, W. Giger and P.L. McCarty,
editors; John Wiley and Sons, New York, 547 pp.
Wilson, L.G., 1980. Monitoring in the vadose zone: a review of
technical elements and methods; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Publication No. 600/7-80- 134,168 pp.
Yaniga, P.M. and J.G. Warburton,, 1984. Discrimination
between real and apparent accumulation of immiscible
hydrocarbons on the water table: a theoretical and empirical
analysis; Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium
on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 311-
315.
28
-------
Section 3
Monitoring Well Planning Considerations
Recordkeeping
The development of an accurate recordkeeping process to
document the construction, installation, sampling and mainte-
nance phases of a monitoring well network plays an integral
part in determining the overall success of the program. An
accurate account of all phases is necessary to ensure that the
goals of the monitoring program (i.e. accurate characterization
of the subsurface hydrogeology and representative water-qual-
ity samples, etc.) are met. It is from these records that information
will be used to resolve any future monitoring problems that will
be encountered.
Recordkeeping begins with the drilling of the monitoring
well. Complete documentation of the drilling and/or sampling
process should be accurately recorded in a field notebook and
transferred to a boring log. Notations about weather, drilling
equipment, personnel on the site, sampling techniques, sub-
surface geology and hydrogeology should be recorded. Litho-
logic descriptions should be based on visual examination of the
cuttings and samples and confined with laboratory analyses
where appropriate. The Unified Soil Classification System is
one universally accepted method of soil description. In the
Unified Soil Classification System, soils are designated by
particle size and moisture content. A description of the system
can be found in a publication by the United States Department
of Interior (1974). Identification and classification of rock
should include typical rock name, notations on pertinent li-
thology, structural features and physical alterations. Although
there is no universally accepted system for describing rock, one
system is described by Williamson (1984). A list of information
that should be recorded in the field notebook is contained in
Table 4. Information in the field notebook is transferred to the
boring log for clarity of presentation. Figure 20 illustrates the
format for a sample boring log. Both the boring log and the field
notes become part of the permanent file for the well.
In addition to the boring log, an "as-built" construction
diagram should be drawn for each well. This differs from a
"typical monitoring well" diagram contained within the design
specifications because the "as-built" diagram contains specific
construction information about the materials and depths of the
well components. An "as-built" diagram eliminates confusion
if the monitoring well was not built exactly as conceived in the
design specifications. In addition, the drawing provides an "at-
a-glance" picture of how the well is constructed (similar to the
function of a boring log). The "as-built" diagram should contain
information about the elevation, depth and materials used in
well construction. Figure 21 illustrates the format for an "as-
built" diagram of a monitoring well.
Finally, records should be kept for each well illustrating
not only the construction details for the well, but also a complete
history of actions related to the well. These include: 1) dates and
notations of physical observations about the well, 2) notations
about suspected problems with the well, 3) water-level mea-
surements, 4) dates of sample collection (including type of
sampler, notations about sample collection and results of labo-
ratory analyses), 5) dates and procedures of well maintenance
and 6) date, method and materials used for abandonment. This
record becomes part of a permanent file that is maintained for
each well.
Decontamination
Decontamination of drilling and formation-sampling
equipment is a quality-control measure that is often required
during drilling and installation of ground-water monitoring
wells. Decontamination is the process of neutralizing, washing
and rinsing equipment that comes in contact with formation
material or ground water that is known or is suspected of being
contaminated. Contaminated material that adheres to the sur-
face of drilling and formation sampling equipment may be
transferred via the equipment: 1) from one borehole to another
and/or 2) vertically within an individual borehole from a
contaminated to an uncontaminated zone. The purpose for
cleaning equipment is to prevent this "cross-contamination"
between boreholes or between vertical zones within a borehole.
Although decontamination is typically used where contaminat-
ion exists, decontamination measures are also employed in
uncontaminated areas as a quality control measure.
Planning a decontamination program for drilling and for-
mation sampling equipment requires consideration of:
1) the location where the decontamination procedures
will be conducted, if different from the actual
drilling site;
2) the types of equipment that will require
decontamination;
3) the frequency that specific equipment will require
decontamination;
4) the cleaning technique and type of cleaning
solutions and/or wash water needed for
decontamimtion;
5) the method for containing the residual
contaminants and cleaning solutions and/or wash
water from the decontamination process, where
necessary; and
6) the use of a quality control measure, such as
equipment blanks or wipe testing, to determine
29
-------
Table 4. Descriptive Information to be Recorded for each Monitoring Well
General information
Well Completion information
Boring number
Date/time to start and finish well
Location of well (include sketch of location)
Elevation of ground surface
Weather conditions during drilling
Name of driller, geologist and other personnel on site
Drilling information
Type of drilling equipment
Type and design of drill bit
Any drilling fluid used
Diameter of drill bit
Diameter of hole
Penetration rate during drilling (fee/minute, minutes/foot, feet/hour, etc.)
Depth to water encountered during drilling
Depth to standing water
Soil/rock classification and description
Total well depth
Remarks on miscellaneous drilling conditions, including:
a) loss or gain of fluid
b) occurrence of boulders
c) cavities or voids
d) borehole conditions
e) changes in color of formation samples or fluid
f) odors while drilling
Sampling information
Types of sampler(s) used
Diameter and length of samplers)
Number of each sample
Start and finish depth of each sample
Split spoon sampling:
a) size and weight of drive hammer
b) number of blows required for penetration of 6 inches
c) free fall distance used to drive sampler
Thin-walled sampling:
a) relative ease or difficulty of pushing sample OR
b) pounds per square inch (psi) necessary to push sample
Rock cores:
a) core barrel drill bit design
b) penetration rate (fee/minute, minutes/foot, fee/hour, etc.)
Percent of sample recovered
Elevation of top of casing (+ .01 foot)
Casing:
a) material
b) diameter
c) total length of casing
d) depth below ground surface
e) how sections joined
f) end cap (yes or no)
Screen:
a) material
b) diameter
c) slot size and length
d) depth to top and bottom of screen
Filter pack:
a) type/size
b) volume emplaced (calculated and actual)
c) depth to top of filter pack
d) source and roundness
e) method of emplacement
Grout and/or sealant:
a) composition
b) method of emplacement
c) volume emplaced (where applicable)
(calculated and actual)
d) depth of grouted interval (top and bottom)
Backfill material:
a) depth of backfilled interval (top and bottom)
b) type of material
Surface seal detail:
a) type of seal
b) depth of seal (must be below frost depth)
Well protector:
a) type
b) locking device
c) vents (yes or no)
Well development:
a) method
b) date/time; start/stop
c) volume and source water (if used)
the effectiveness of the decontamination
procedure, if appropriate.
The degree to which each of these items are considered
when developing a decontamination program varies with the
level of contamination anticipated at the site. Where the site is
"clean," decontamination efforts may simply consist of rinsing
drilling and formation sampling equipment with water between
samples and/or boreholes. As the level of anticipated or actual
contamination increases, so should the decontamination effort.
A document by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (1987) discusses decontamination at CERCLA sites.
One important factor when designing a decontamination
program is the type of contaminant. The greater the toxicity
or the more life-threatening the contaminant, the more exten-
sive and thorough the decontamination program must be. The
following discussion focuses on measures to be employed at
sites where contamination is known or suspected or decon-
tamination is desired as a quality control measure. Less formally
defined decontamination efforts may be employed at any site.
Decontamination Area
An appropriate decontamination area at a site is selected
based on the ability to: 1) control access to the decontamination
area, 2) control or contain residual material removed from the
surfaces of the drilling and formation sampling equipment and
3) store clean equipment to prevent recontamination before use.
In addition, the decontamination area should be located in close
proximity to the drilling area to minimize further site con-
tamination. The importance of these considerations during the
selection process for a decontamination area will be influenced
by the type of contaminants involved and the extent of con-
tamination at the site. For example, the decontamination area
for drilling and formation sampling equipment may be located
near the drilling rig when: 1) the ground surface is regarded as
noncontaminated, 2) the known or suspected subsurface con-
taminants are non-hazardous and 3) the drilling method permits
good control over the containment of cuttings from the borehole.
However, the decontamination area should be located an ad-
equate distance away from the rig to avoid contamination of
clean equipment by airborne lubricating oil or hydraulic fluids
from the drilling rig. Once drilling and sampling equipment is
cleaned, the equipment should not be placed directly on the
ground surface even though the area is generally regarded as
noncontaminated. Clean equipment should be placed, at a
minimum, on top of plastic ground sheeting, and the sheeting
30
-------
BORING NO. ___2A_
SH_1_OF.
PROJECT AML Manufacturing
BORING LOG
DATE START
LOCATION Sussex County
CASING I.D. 425"
CONTRACTOR .
GROUND ELEV.
, CORE SIZE NX
337.09'
Aug. 30. 1987 FINISH Aug. 31.1987
TOTAL DEPTH (FT), 23.50'
Sorowls & Sons
TYPE
LOGGED BY
Air Rotary w/Casing Hammer
S. Smith
SCALE
IN
FEET
]
.
5' "^
10' -
15' -
1
20' .
25' -
Overbur
Rock
LITHOLOGIC SAMPLE
SYMBOL ^
AND NO.
PPI
r^u'.-Cl'^^tfy jj :^^
ipSil ss"1
ttffi$& SS-2
BLOWS
ORREC
45-29
-36
43-45
-56
i^§3;S&
I
^
J !
j
Hon 13.0'
10.5'
DEPTH
RANGE
5.0'
6.5'
10.0'-
11.5'
ROD
S
5.25'
5.0
100
Total nppth 23.50'
Commen
tc Surface casino
driven 8" into rock
RATE
OF PEN
MIN/FT.
as
0.7
Core
Breaks
^^^^
^•••^•BMMBM
SiSS
^=^
^
SOIL AND ROCK DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS
(Unified son class system Rock description. Depth to water
table. Loss of anil fluid, etc |
Gravelly SILT, little sand, trace clay
About 30% pebbles and granules.
Moderately moist Moderate yellowish brown
( 10 YR5/4. mottled 5Y5/2). drab Till.
|GM]
Gravelley SILT, little sand, trace clay
About 30% pebbles and granules. Dry to slightly
moist. Moderate yellowish brown (10 YR5/4);
drab Till
|GM]
Medium dark
SILTSTONE.
hard except ;
weathered st
imately as de
calcareous C
SILTSTONE
Medium dark
SILTSTONE.
gray to dark gray SILTSTONE, sandy
with minor shale seams Fresh and
it breaks along slightly 10 moderately
lale seams. Jointed and broken approx-
picted. Coquina seam (15.1' -15.2'). very
enerally only calcareous in sandy
ayers. Wet (@I75'
gray to dark gray SILTSTONE. sandy
and minor shale seams, same as above
j
End of Borinci - Total Depth = 2350'
Piezometer 2A installed with screened interval of
18.0 to 230
Water Level
Date
Time
Elevation Measuring Point
16.2' 16.35'
8/30/87 8/30/87
1:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m.
Top of Casing Top of Casing
Figure 20. Sample boring log format (after Electric Power Research Institute, 1985).
31
-------
Well Number 7H
Start 8/13/87 B:QO am -1-fifl pm
Finish 8/14/87 10 am -12:00 p.m.
Drillinn Method Hollow Stem Auner
-- 3.0•-*!
Frost Sleeve
- Master Lock #632
Steel (schedule 40) Protective
Casing with Hinged Cap
,-Vented Cap
p urain
/r Concrete Pad (min. 4" thick on
PI undisturbed or compacted soil)
Elevation 856.03 feet
Sand
;Concrete Seal
Sand
Granular Bentonite Seal
2% Bentonite-Cement Seal
2" PVC Casing (Schedule 40,
Flush Joint, Threaded
Granular Bentonite Seal
Silica Fine-Grained Sand
(Mortar Sand)
2" PVC Well Screen with
0.010 Inch Slot Open
Filter Pack (Clean Medium to
Coarse Silica Sand)
- 2" PVC Casing
28.0'
10.25"
Figure 21. Format for an "as-built" monitoring well diagram.
should be discarded after each borehole is drilled. Clean equip-
ment may also be stored off the ground on storage or equipment
racks until used for drilling or formation sampling. Heavy
equipment, such as the drilling rig, water truck or any other
support vehicle, should be cleaned in the decontamination area
prior to demobilizing from the site.
The presence of hazardous materials at a drilling site
dictates that a more controlled access area be established for
equipment decontamination to prevent cross-contamination
and to provide worker safety. Figure 22 shows a general layout
of a contaminant reduction zone where systematic decontami-
nation procedures are employed as personnel and equipment
move from the hazardous material exclusion zone to a clean,
non-hazardous support zone.
Types of Equipment
Decontamination of drilling and formation sampling
equipment involves cleaning tools used in the borehole. This
equipment includes drill bits, auger sections, drill-string tools,
drill rods, split-barrel or thin-wall tube samplers, bailers, tremie
pipes, clamps, hand tools and steel cable. Equipment with a
porous surface, such as natural rope, cloth hoses and wooden
blocks or handles, cannot be thoroughly decontaminated and
should be disposed of properly after completion of the borehole.
The specific drilling and formation sampling equipment that
needs to be cleaned should be listed in the equipment decon-
tamination program.
A decontamination program for equipment should also
include cleaning heavy equipment including the drill rig and
support trucks. Advanced planning is necessary to ensure that
the decontamination area is adequately sized to accommodate
large vehicles, and that any contaminants removed from the
vehicles are properly controlled and contained within the de-
contamination area. This should include the "tracking zone"
created by vehicles as they move into and out of the area.
Frequency of Equipment Decontamination
A decontamination program for equipment should detail
the frequency that drilling and formation sampling equipment
is to be cleaned. For example, drilling equipment should be
decontaminated between boreholes. This frequency of cleaning
is designed to prevent cross-contamination from one borehole
to the next. However, drilling equipment may require more
frequent cleaning to prevent cross-contamination between
vertical zones within a single borehole. Where drilling equip-
ment is used to drill through a shallow contaminated zone and
to install surface casing to seal-off the contaminated zone, the
drilling tools should be decontaminated prior to drilling deeper.
Where possible, fieldwork should be initiated by drilling in that
portion of the site where the least contamination is suspected.
Formation sampling equipment should be decontaminated
between each sampling event. If a sampling device is not
adequately cleaned between successive sampling depths, or
between boreholes, contaminants may be introduced into the
successive sample(s) via the formation sampling device.
Cleaning Solutions and/or Wash Water
Decontamination of equipment can be accomplished using
a variety of techniques and fluids. The most common and
generally preferred methods of equipment decontamination
involve either a clean potable water wash, steam cleaning or
water/wash steam cleaning combination. Water washing may
be accomplished using either low or high pressure. If a low
pressure wash is used, it may be necessary to dislodge residual
material from the equipment with a brush to ensure complete
decontamination. Steam cleaning is accomplished using por-
table, high-pressure steam cleaners equipped with pressure
hose and fittings.
Sometimes solutions other than water or steam are used for
equipment decontamination. Table 5 lists some of the chemi-
cals and solution strengths that have been used in equipment
decontamination programs. One commonly used cleaning so-
lution is a non-phosphate detergent. Detergents are preferred
over other cleaning solutions because the detergent alone does
not pose a handling or disposal problem. In general, when a
cleaning solution for equipment decontamination is necessary,
a non-phosphate detergent should be used unless it is demon-
strated that the environmental contaminant in question cannot
be removed from the surface of the equipment by detergents.
Acids or solvents should be used as cleaning solutions only
under exceptional circumstances because these cleaners are, in
32
-------
—I
Heavy Equipment
Decontamination
Area
—X X- -X-gJ-X-^-X- -X X
-0—0—
Auxiliary
Access
Control Path
Exit Path
-X— X
Contamination
Reduction Zone
- -o—o—o—o—
-X- X
s*
o
-5&
Legend
x—x- Hotline
O—O- Contamination
Control Line
Access Control
Point • Entrance
Access Control
Point • Exit
o—o—o—o—o—o—
Support Zone
r
J Dressout ]
I Area ,
L.
Redress
Area !
7
Entry Path
Figure 22. Typical layout showing decontamination areas at a hazardous materials site (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 1984).
and of themselves, hazardous materials and may serve as
contaminants if introduced into the borehole. When using
chemical solutions for equipment decontamination, water or
steam should always be used as a final rinse to remove any
residual chemical cleaner from the surface of the equipment and
thereby prevent contamination of the borehole by the cleaning
solution.
I
According to Moberly (1985), a typical sequence for
decontamination of low to moderately contaminated equipment
might include:
1) water or steam rinse to remove particulates;
2) steam wash with water or non-phosphate
detergent; and
3) steam or water rinse with potable water.
Additional wash/rinse sequences may be necessary to
completely remove the contaminants.
Containment of Residual Contaminants and
Cleaning Solutions and/or Wash Water
Contaminated material removed from the surfaces of
equipment and cleaning solutions and/or wash water used
during decontamination usually require containment and proper
disposal. If non-hazardous contaminants are involved, the
decontamination program for equipment may not require pro-
visions for the disposal of wash water and residual material
removed from the equipment. Conversely, a decontamination
program for equipment exposed to hazardous materials requires
provision for catchment and disposal of the contaminated
material, cleaning solution and/or wash water.
Where contaminated material and cleaning fluids must be
contained from heavy equipment such as drill rigs and support
vehicles, the decontamination area must be properly floored.
Preferred flooring for the decontamination area is typically a
33
-------
Table 5. List of Selected Cleaning Solutions Used
Chemical Solution
for Equipment Decontamination (Moberly, 1985)
Uses/Remarks
Clean Potable Water
Low-Sudsing Detergents
(Alconox)
Sodium Carbonate
(Washing Soda)
Sodium Bicarbonate
(Baking Soda)
Trisodium Phosphate
(TSP Oakite)
None
Follow Manufacturer's
Directions
4#/10 Gal Water
4#/10 Gal Water
2#/10 Gal Water
4#/10 Gal Water
Calcium Hydrochloride (HTH) 8#/10 Gal Water
Hydrochloric. Acid 1 Pt/10 Gal Water
Citric, Tartaric, Oxalic Acids 4#/10 Gal Water
(or their respective salts)
Organic Solvents (Acetone, Concentrated
Methanol, Methylene Chloride)
Used under high pressure or steam to remove heavy mud, etc., or to
rinse other solutions
General all-purpose cleaner
Effective for neutralizing organic acids, heavy metals, metal
processing wastes
Used to neutralize either base or neutral acid contaminants
Similar to sodium carbonate
Useful for solvents & organic compounds (such as Toluene,
Chloroform, Trichloroethylene), PBB's and PCB's
Disinfectant, bleaching & oxidizing agent used for pesticides,
fungicides, chlorinated phenols, dioxins, cyanides, ammonia & other
non-acidic inorganic wastes
Used for inorganic bases, alkali and caustic wastes
Used to clean heavy metal contamination
Used to clean equipment contaminated with organics or well casing to
remove surface oils, etc
reinforced, curbed, concrete pad which is sloped toward one
comer where a sump pit is installed (Moberly, 1985). Where a
concrete pad is impractical, planking can be used to construct
a solid flooring that is then covered by a nonporous surface and
sloped toward a collection facility. Catchment of contaminants
and cleaning fluids from the decontamination of lighter-weight
drilling equipment and hand tools can be accomplished by
using small trenches lined with plastic sheeting or in wash tubs
or stick cans. The contaminated cleaning fluids can be stored
temporarily in metal or plastic cans or drums until removed
from the site for proper disposal.
safety plan for field personnel should be of foremost concern
when drilling in known or suspected contaminated areas. Spe-
cific health and safety procedures necessary at the site depend
on the toxicity and physical and chemical properties of known
or suspected contaminants. Where hazardous materials are
involved or suspected, a site safety program should be devel-
oped by a qualified professional in accordance with the Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration requirements in 29
CFR 1910.120. Field personnel at hazardous sites should re-
ceive medical screening and basic health and safety training, as
well as specific on-site training.
Effectiveness of Decontamination Procedures References
A decontamination program for drilling and formation
sampling equipment may need to include quality-control proce-
dures for measuring the effectiveness of the cleaning methods.
Quality-control measures typically include either equipment
blank collection or wipe testing. Equipment blanks are samples
of the final rinse water that are collected after cleaning the
equipment. Equipment blanks should recollected in appropriate
sampling containers, properly preserved, stored and transported
to a laboratory for analyses of contaminants known or suspected
at the site. Wipe testing is performed by wiping a cloth or paper
patch over the surface of the equipment after cleaning. The test
patch is placed in a sealed container and sent to a laboratory for
analysis. Laboratory results from either equipment blanks or
wipe tests provide "after-the-fact" information that may be used
to evaluate whether or not the cleaning methods were effective
in removing the contaminants of concern at the site.
Personnel Decontamination
A decontamination program for drilling and sampling
equipment is typically developed in conjunction with health
and safety plans for field personnel working at the site. Although
a discussion of site safety plans and personnel protective
measures are beyond the scope of this manual, the health and
Electric Power Research Institute, 1985. Ground water manual
for the electric utility industry: groundwater investigations
and mitigation techniques, volume 3; Research Reports
Center, Palo Alto, California, 360 pp.
Moberly, Richard L., 1985. Equipment decontamination;
Ground Water Age, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 36-39.
United States Department of Interior, 1974. Earth manual, a
water resources technical publication; Bureau of
Reclamation, United States Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C., 810 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1984.
Standard operating safety guides; United States
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Emergency
Response, United States Government Printing Office,
Washington, B.C., 166 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. A
compendium of Superfund field operations methods;
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Publication No. 540/P-87/001, 644 pp.
Williamson, D.A., 1984. Unified classification system; Bulletin
of Engineering Geologists, vol. 21, no. 3, The Association
of Engineering Geologists, Lawrence, Kansas, pp. 345-
354.
34
-------
Section 4
Description and Selection of Drilling Methods
Introduction
Monitoring wells can be, and have been, installed by nearly
every conceivable type of drilling and completion technique.
However, every drilling technology has a special range of
conditions where the technique is most effective in dealing with
the inherent hydrogeologic conditions and in fulfilling the
purpose of the monitoring well. For example, constructing
wells by driving wellpoint or by jetting provides low-cost
water-level information but severely limits the ability to collect
detailed stratigraphic information.
The following section contains a description of common
methods of monitoring well construction and includes a dis-
cussion of the applications and limitations of each technique. A
matrix that helps the user determine the most appropriate
technology for monitoring well installation in a variety of
hydrogeologic settings with specific design objectives is also
included in this section.
Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Installation
Hand Augers
Hand augers may be used to install shallow monitoring
wells (0 to 15 feet in depth) with casing diameters of 2 inches
or less. A typical hand auger, as shown in Figure 23, cuts a hole
that ranges from 3 to 9 inches in diameter. The auger is
advanced by turning into the soil until the auger is filled. The
auger is then removed and the sample is dumped from the auger.
Motorized units for one- or two-operators are available.
Generally, the borehole cannot be advanced below the
water table because the borehole collapses. It is often possible
to stabilize the borehole below the water table by adding water,
with or without drilling mud additives. The auger may then be
advanced a few feet into a shallow aquifer and a well intake and
casing installed. Another option to overcome borehole collapse
below the water table is to drive a wellpoint into the augered
hole and thereby advance the wellpoint below the water table.
The wellpoint can then be used to measure water levels and to
provide access for water-quality samples.
Better formation samples may sometimes be obtained by
reducing the hole size one or more times while augering to the
desired depth. Because the head of the auger is removable, the
borehole diameter can be reduced by using smaller diameter
auger heads. Shaft extensions are usually added in 3-or 4-foot
increments. As the borehole size decreases, the amount of
energy required to turn the auger is also reduced. Where
necessary, short sections of lightweight casing can be installed
to prevent upper material from caving into the borehole.
Figure 23. Diagram of a hand auger.
A more complete list of the applications and limitations of
hand augers is found in Table 6.
Driven Wells
Driven wells consist of a wellpoint (screen) that is attached
to the bottom of a casing (Figure 24). Wellpoints and casing are
usually 1.25 to 2 inches in diameter and are made of steel to
withstand the driving process. The connection between the
wellpoint and the casing is made either by welding or using
35
-------
- Drive cap
S~- Casing
• Coupling
•Screen
Wellpoint
Figure 24. Diagram of a wellpoint.
drive couplings. Drive couplings are specially designed to
withstand the force of the blows used to drive the casing;
however, if the casing is overdriven it will usually fail at a
coupling. When constructing a well, a drive cap is placed on top
of the uppermost section of casing, and the screen and casing are
driven into the ground. New sections of drive casing are usually
attached in 4 or 5-foot sections as the well is driven deeper.
Crude stratigraphic information can be obtained by recording
the number of blows per foot of penetration as the wellpoint is
driven.
Wellpoints can either be driven by hand or with heavy
drive heads mounted on a tripod, stiff-leg derrick or similar
hoisting device. When driven by hand, a weighted drive sleeve
such as is used to install fenceposts is typically used. Depths up
to 30 feet can be achieved by hand in sands or sand and gravel
with thin clay seams; greater depths of 50 feet or more are
possible with hammers up to 1,000 pounds in weight. Driving
through dense silts and clays and/or bouldery silts and clays is
often extremely difficult or impossible. In the coarser materials,
penetration is frequently terminated by boulders. Additionally,
if the wellpoint is not structurally strong it may be destroyed by
driving in dense soils or by encountering boulders. When
driving the wellpoint through silts and/or clays the screen
openings in the wellpoint may become, plugged. The screen
may be very difficult to clean or to reopen during development,
particularly if the screen is placed in a low permeability zone.
To lessen penetration difficulties and screen clogging
problems, driven wells may be installed using a technique
similar to that used in cable tool drilling. A 4-inch casing (with
only a drive shoe and no wellpoint) may be driven to the targeted
monitoring depth. As the casing is driven, the inside of the
casing is cleaned using a bailing technique. With the casing still
in the borehole, a wellpoint attached to an inner string of casing
is lowered into the borehole and the outer casing is removed. As
the casing is removed, the well must be properly sealed and
grouted. A second option can also be used to complete the well.
With the casing still in the borehole, a wellpoint with a packer
at the top can be lowered to the bottom of the casing. The casing
is then pulled back to expose the screen. The original casing
remains in the borehole to complete the well. Either of these
completion techniques permit the installation of thermoplastic
or fluoropolymer in addition to steel as the screen material.
A more complete listing of the applications and limitations
of driven wells is found in Table 7.
Jet Percussion
In the jet-percussion drilling method, a wedge-shaped drill
bit is attached to the lower end of the drill pipe (Figure 25).
Water is pumped down the drill pipe under pressure and
discharges through ports on each side of the drill bit. The bit is
alternately raised and dropped to loosen unconsolidated mate-
rials or to break up rock at the bottom of the borehole. Concomi-
tantly, the drill pipe is rotated by hand, at the surface, to cut a
round and straight hole. The drilling fluid flows over the bit and
up the annular space between the drill pipe and the borehole
wall. The drilling fluid lubricates the bit, carries cuttings to the
surface and deposits the cuttings in a settling pit. The fluid is
then recirculated down the drill pipe.
In unconsolidated material the casing is advanced by a
drive-block as the borehole is deepened. If the casing is posi-
tioned near the bottom of the borehole, good samples can be
obtained as the cuttings are circulated to the surface and
stratigraphic variations can be identified. Where the borehole is
stable, the well can be drilled without simultaneously driving
the casing.
After the casing has been advanced to the desired monitor-
ing depth, a well intake can be installed by lowering through
the casing. The casing is then pulled back to expose the well
intake. Casing diameters of 4 inches or less can be installed by
jet percussion. Depths of wells are typically less than 150 feet,
although much greater depths have been attained. This method
is most effective in drilling unconsolidated sands.
36
-------
—Jetting pipe
_ Cuttings washed up
annular space
. Drilling fluid discharged
through port in bit
Figure 25. Diagram of jet-percussion drilling (after Speedstar
Division of Koehring Company, 1983).
A more complete listing of applications and limitations of
jet-percussion drilling is found in Table 8.
Solid-Flight Augers
Solid-flight augers (i.e. solid-stem, solid-core or continu-
ous flight augers) are typically used in multiple sections to
provide continuous flighting. The first, or lowermost, flight is
provided with a cutter head that is approximately 2 inches larger
in diameter than the flighting of the augers (Figure 26). As the
cutting head is advanced into the earth, the cuttings are rotated
upward to the surface by moving along the continuous flighting.
The augers are rotated by a rotary drive head at the surface
and forced downward by a hydraulic pulldown or feed device.
The individual flights are typically 5 feet in length and are
connected by a variety of pin, box and keylock combinations
and devices. Where used for monitoring well installation,
available auger diameters typically range from 6 to 14 inches in
outside diameter. Many of the drilling rigs used for monitoring
well installation in stable unconsolidated material can reach
depths of approximately 70 feet with 14-inch augers and
approximately 150 feet with 6-inch augers.
In stable soils, cuttings can sometimes be collected at the
surface as the material is rotated up the auger flights. The
sample being rotated to the surface is often bypassed, however,
Auger
connection
c
Flighting •
Cutter head
Figure 26. Diagram of a solid-flight auger (after Central Mine
Equipment Company, 1987).
by being pushed into the borehole wall of the shallower forma-
tions. The sample often falls back into the borehole along the
annular opening and may not reach the surface until thoroughly
mixed with other materials. There is commonly no return of
samples to the surface after the first saturated zone has been
encountered.
Samples may also be collected by carefully rotating the
augers to the desired depth, stopping auger rotation and remov-
ing the augers from the borehole. In a relatively stable forma-
tion, samples will be retained on the auger flights as the augers
are removed from the borehole. The inner material is typically
more representative of the formation at the drilled depths and
may be exposed by scraping the outer material away from the
sample on the augers. Because the borehole often eaves after the
saturated zone is reached, samples collected below the water
table are less reliable. The borehole must be redrilled every time
the augers are removed, and the formation not yet drilled may
be disturbed as the borehole above collapses. This is particu-
larly true in heaving formations.
37
-------
Table 6. Applications and Limitations of Hand Augers
Application*
Limitations
Shallow soils investigations
Soil samples
Water-bearing zone identification
Piezometer, lysimeter and small diameter monitoring well
installation
Labor intensive, therefore applicable when labor is inexpensive
No casing material restrictions
Limited to very shallow depths
Unable to penetrate extremely dense or rocky
soil
Borehole stability difficult to maintain
Labor intensive
Table 7. Application and Limitations of Driven Wells
Applications
Limitation
.Water-level monitoring in shallow formations
. Water samples can be collected
. Dewatering
. Water supply
• Low cost encourages multiple sampling points
.Depth limited to approximately 50 feet (except in sandy
material)
.Small diameter casing
.No soil samples
• Steel casing interferes with some chemical analysis
.Lack of stratigraphic detail creates uncertainty regarding
screened zones and/or cross contamination
.Cannot penetrate dense and/or some dry materials
.No annular space for completion procedures
Table 8. Application and Limitation of Jet-Percussion Drilling
Appiications
Limitation
.Allows water-level measurement
.Sample collection in form of cuttings to surface
. Primary use in unconsolidated formations, but may be used in
some softer consolidated rock
.Best application is cinch borehole with 2-inch casing and
screen installed, sealed and grouted
.Drilling mud maybe needed to return cuttings to surface
. Diameter limited to 4 inches
.Installation slow in dense, boundery day/till or similar
formations
.Disturbance of the formation possible if borehole not
cased immedately
Because the core of augers is solid steel, the only way to
collect "undisturbed" split-spoon or thin-wall samples is to
remove the entire string of augers from the borehole, insert the
sampler on the end of the drill rod, and put the entire string back
into the borehole. This sampling process becomes very tedious
and expensive as the borehole gets deeper because the complete
string of augers must be removed and reinserted each time a
sample is taken. Sampling subsequent to auger removal is only
possible if the walls of the borehole are sufficiently stable to
prevent collapse during sampling. Boreholes are generally not
stable after even a moderately thin saturated zone has been
penetrated. This means that it is visually not possible to obtain
either split-spoon or thin-wall samples after the shallowest
water table is encountered.
The casing and well intake are also difficult to install after
a saturated zone has been penetrated. In this situation, it is
sometimes possible to auger to the top of a saturated zone,
remove the solid augers and then install a monitoring well by
either driving, jetting or bailing a well intake into position.
A more complete listing of the applications and limitations
of solid-flight augers is found in Table 9.
Hollow-Stem Augers
Similar to solid-flight augers, hollow-stem auger drilling
is accomplished using a series of interconnected auger flights
with a cutting head at the lowermost end. As the augers are
rotated and pressed downward, the cuttings are rotated up the
continuous flighting.
Unlike the solid-flight augers the center core of the auger
is open in the hollow-stem flights (Figure 27). Thus, as the
augers are rotated and pressed into the ground, the augers act as
casing and stabilize the borehole. Small-diameter drill rods and
samplers can then be passed through the hollow center of the
augers for sampling. The casing and well intake also can be
installed without borehole collapse.
To collect the samples through hollow-stem augers, the
augers are first rotated and pressed to the desired sampling
depth. The inside of the hollow stem is cleaned out, if neces-
sary. The material inside the auger can be removed by a spoon
sampler with a retainer basket jetting and/or drilling with a bit
attached to smaller-diameter drill rods. If the jetting action is
carried to the bottom of the augers, the material immediately
below the augers will be disturbed. Next, either a split-spoon
38
-------
Drive cap
Center Plug
Pilot assembly
components ,
\
Pilot Bit
Rod to cap
adapter
Auger connector
Hollow stem
auger section
Center rod
Auger
connector
Auger head
Replaceable
carbide insert
auger tooth
Figure 27. Typical components of a hollow-stem auger (after
Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987).
(ASTM, 1586) or thin-wall (ASTM, 1587) sampler is placed on
the lower end of the drill rods and lowered to the bottom of the
borehole. The split-spoon sampler can then be driven to collect
a disturbed sample or the thin-wall sampler can be pressed to
collect an "undisturbed sample from the strata immediately
below the cutting head of the auger. Samples can either be taken
continuously or at selected intervals. If sampling is continuous,
the augers are rotated down to the bottom of the previously-
sampled strata and cleaned out if necessary. The sampler is then
reinserted through the auger and advanced into the undisturbed
sediments ahead of the auger.
With the augers acting as casing and with access to the
bottom of the borehole through the hollow stem, it is possible
to drill below the top of the saturated zone. When the saturated
zone is penetrated, finely-ground material and water may mix
to forma mud that coats the borehole wall. This "mud plaster"
may seal water-bearing zones and minimize inter-zonal cross
connection, This sealing is uncontrolled and unpredictable
because it depends on: 1) the quality of the silt/clay seal, 2) the
differential hydrostatic pressure between the zones and 3) the
transmissivity of the zones. Therefore, where possible cross
contamination is a concern, the seal developed during augering
cannot be relied upon to prevent cross contamination. One other
potential source of cross contamination is through leakage into
or out of the augers at the flighting joints. This leakage can be
minimized by installing o-ring seals at the joints connecting the
flights.
While drilling with hollow-stem augers with the center of
the stem open, formation material can rise into the hollow stem
as the auger is advanced. This material must be cleaned out of
the auger before formation samples are collected. To prevent
intrusion of material while drilling, hollow-stem auger bore-
holes can be drilled with a center plug that is installed on the
bottom of the drill rods and inserted during drilling. A small
drag bit may also be added to prevent intrusion into the hollow
stem. An additional discussion on drilling with hollow-stem
augers can be found in Appendix A, entitled, "Drilling and
Constructing Monitoring Wells with Hollow-Stem Augers."
Samples are collected by removing the drill rods and the
attached center plug and inserting the sampler through the
hollow stem. Samples can then be taken ahead of the augers.
When drilling into an aquifer that is under even low to
moderate confining pressure, the sand and gravel of the aquifer
frequently "heave" upward into the hollow stem. This heaving
occurs because the pressure in the aquifer is greater than the
atmospheric pressure in the borehole. If a center plug is used
during drilling, heave frequently occurs as the rods are pulled
back and the bottom of the borehole is opened. This problem is
exacerbated by the surging action created as the center plug and
drill rods are removed.
When heaving occurs, the bottom portion of the hollow
stem fills with sediment, and the auger must be cleaned out
before formation samples can be collected. However, the act of
cleaning out the auger can result in further heaving, thus
compounding the problem. Furthermore, as the sand and gravel
heave upward into the hollow stem, the materials immediately
below the auger are no longer naturally compacted or stratified.
The sediments moving into the hollow stem are segregated by
the upward-flowing water. It is obvious that once heaving has
Table 9. Applications and Limitations of Solid-Flight Augera
Applications
Limitation
• Shallow soils investigations
• Soil samples
• Vadose zone monitoring wells (iysimeters)
• Monitoring wells in saturated, stable soils
• identification of depth to bedrock
• Fast and mobile
Unacceptable soil samples unless spilt-spoon or thin-wall
samples are taken
Soil sample data limited to areas and depths where stable
soils are predominant
Unable to install monitoring wells in most unconsolidated
aquifers because of borehole caving upon auger removal
Depth capability decreases as diameter of auger increases
Monitoring well diameter limited by auger diameter
39
-------
occurred, it is not possible to obtain a sample at that depth that
is either representative or undisturbed.
Four common strategies that are used to alleviate heaving
problems include:
1) adding water into the hollow stem in an attempt to
maintain sufficient positive head inside the augers
to offset the hydrostatic pressure of the formation;
2) adding drilling mud additives (weight and
viscosity control) to the water inside the hollow
stem to improve the ability of the fluid to counteract
the hydrostatic pressure of the formation;
3) either screening the lower auger section or
screening the lowermost portion of the drill rods
both above and below the center plug, in such a
manner that water is allowed to enter the auger.
This arrangement equalizes the hydraulic pressure,
but prevents the formation materials from entering
the augers; and
4) drilling with a pilot bit, knock-out plug or winged
clam to physically prevent the formation from
entering the hollow stem.
The most common field procedure is to add water to the
hollow stem. However, this method is frequently unsuccessful
because it is difficult to maintain enough water in the auger to
equalize the formation pressure as the drill rods are raised
during the sampling process. Adding drilling mud may lessen
the heaving problem, but volume replacement of mud displace-
ment by removal of drilling rods must be fast enough to
maintain a positive head on the formation. Additionally, drill-
ing mud additives may not be desirable where questions about
water-quality sampling from the monitoring well will arise. A
third option, screening the lowermost auger flight, serves two
purposes: 1) the formation pressure can equalize with minimal
formation disturbance and 2) water-quality samples and small-
scale pumping tests can be performed on individual zones
within the aquifer or on separate aquifers as the formations are
encountered. Wire-wound screened augers were developed
particularly for this purpose and are commercially available
(Figure 28). By using a pilot bit, knock-out plug or winged
clam, heaving is physically prevented until these devices are
removed for sampling. In essence, the hollow stem functions as
a solid stem auger. However, once these devices are dislodged
during sampling, problems with heaving may still need to be
overcome by using an alternative strategy.
Hollow-stem augers are typically limited to drilling in
unconsolidated materials. However, if the cutting head of the
auger is equipped with carbide-tipped cutting teeth, it is often
possible to drill into the top of weathered bedrock a short
distance. The augers can, then be used as temporary surface
casing to shutoff water flow that commonly occurs at the soil/
rock interface. The seal by the augers may not be complete;
therefore, this practice is not recommended where cross con-
tamination is a concern. The rock beneath the casing can then
be drilled with a small-diameter roller bit or can be cored.
The most widely-available hollow-stem augers are 6.25-
inch outside diameter auger flights with 3.25-inch inside diam-
eter hollow stems. The equipment most frequently available to
• Continuous slot
screen
- Auger flighting
nead
(ft
Figure 28. Diagram of a screened auger.
power the augers can reach depths of 150 to 175 feet in clayey/
silty /sandy soils. Much greater depths have been attained, but
greater depths cannot be predictably reached in most settings.
A 12-inch outside diameter auger with a 6-inch inside diameter
hollow stem is becoming increasingly available, but the depth
limit for this size auger is usually 50 to 75 feet. Because of the
availability and relative ease of formation sample collection,
hollow-stem augering techniques are used for the installation of
the overwhelming majority of monitoring wells in the United
States.
A more complete listing of the advantages and disadvan-
tages of hollow-stem augers is found in Table 10. A more
comprehensive evaluation of this technology is presented in
Appendix A.
Direct Mud Rotary
In direct mud rotary drilling, the drilling fluid is pumped
down the drill rods and through a bit that is attached at the lower
end of the drill rods. The fluid circulates back to the surface by
moving up the annular space between the drill rods and the wall
40
-------
Table 10. Application* and Limitations of Hollow-Stem Auger*
Application*
Limitation*
1 All types of soil investigations
• Permits good soil sampling with split-spoon or thin-wall
samplers
> Water quality sampling
> Monitoring well installation in all unconsolidated formations
> Can serve as temporary casing for coring rock
> Can be used in stable formations to set surface casing
(example: drill 12-inch borehole; remove auger; set 6-inch
casing; drill 7 1/4-inch borehole with 3 1/4-inch ID augers to rock;
core rock with 3-inch tools; install 1-inch piezometer; pull augers)
> Difficulty in preserving sample integrity in heaving formations
• Formation invasion by water or drilling mud if used to control
heaving
• Possible cross contamination of aquifers where annular
space not positively controlled by water or drilling mud or
surface casing
• Limited diameter of augers limits casing size
• Smearing of clays may seal off aquifer to be monitored
of the borehole. At the surface, the fluid discharges through a
pipe or ditch and enters into a segregated or baffled sedimen-
tation tank, pond or pit. The settling pit overflows into a suction
pit where a pump recirculates the fluid back through the drill
rods (Figure 29).
During drilling, the drill stem is rotated at the surface by
either top head or rotary table drive. Down pressure is attained
either by pull-down devices or drill collars. Pull-down devices
transfer rig weight to the bit; drill collars add weight directly to
the drill stem. When chill collars mused, the rig holds back the
excess weight to control the weight on the bit. Most rigs that are
used to install monitoring wells use the pull-down technique
because the wells are relatively shallow.
Properly mixed drilling fluid serves several functions in
mud rotary drilling. The mud: 1) cools and lubricates the bit, 2)
stabilizes the borehole wall, 3) prevents the inflow of formation
fluids and 4) minimizes cross contamination between aquifers.
To perform these functions, the drilling fluid tends to infiltrate
permeable zones and tends to interact chemically with the
formation fluids. This is why the mud must be removed during
the development process. This chemical interaction can inter-
fere with the specific function of a monitoring well and prevent
collection of a sample that is representative of the in-situ
ground-water quality.
Samples can be obtained directly from the stream of
circulated fluid by placing a sample-collecting device such as
a shale shaker in the discharge flow before the settling pit.
However, the quality of the samples obtained from the circu-
lated fluid is generally not satisfactory to characterize the
formations for the design of monitoring wells. Split-spoon,
thin-wall or wireline samples can and should be collected when
drilling with the direct rotary method.
Table 11. Applications and Limitations of Direct Mud Rotary Drilling
Both split-spoon and thin-wall samples can be obtained in
unconsolidated material by using a bit with an opening through
which sampling tools can be inserted. Drilling fluid circulation
must be broken to collect samples. The rotary drill stem acts as
casing as the sample tools are inserted through the drill stem and
bit and a sample is collected.
Direct rotary drilling is also an effective means of drilling
and/or coring consolidated reek. Where overburden is present,
an oversized borehole is drilled into rock and surface casing is
installed and grouted in place. After the grout sets, drilling
proceeds using a roller cone bit (Figure 30). Samples can be
taken either from the circulated fluid or by a core barrel that is
inserted into the borehole.
For the rig sizes that are most commonly used for moni-
toring well installation, the maximum diameter borehole is
typically 12 inches. Unconsolidated deposits are sometimes
drilled with drag or fishtail-type bits, and consolidated forma-
tions such as sandstone and shale are drilled with tricone bits.
Where surface casing is installed, nominal 8-inch casing is
typically used, and a 7 5/8 or 7 7/8-inch borehole is continued
below the casing. In unconsolidated formations, these diam-
eters permit a maximum 4-inch diameter monitoring well to be
installed, filter-packed and sealed in the open borehole. In
consolidated formations, a 4 5/8-inch outside diameter casing
can be used in a 75/8-inch borehole because there are relatively
few borehole wall stability problems in consolidated rock. This
smaller annular space is usually sufficient to permit tremie
placement of filter pack, bentonite seal and grout.
A more complete listing of applications and limitations of
direct mud rotary drilling is found in Table 11.
Application
Limitations
.Rapid drilling of clay, silt and reasonably compacted sand and
gravel
. Allows split-spoon and thin-wall sampling in unconsolidated
materials
.Allows core sampling in consolidated rock
. Drilling rigs widely available
.Abundant and fexible range of tool sizes and depth capabilities
.Very sophisticated drilling and mud programs available
.Geophysical borehole logs
.Difficult to remove drilling mud and wall cake from outer
perimeter of filter pack during development
.Bentonite or other drilling fluid additives may influence quality
of ground-water samples
.Circulated (ditch) samples poor for monitoring well screen
selection
.Split-spoon and thin-wall samplers are expensive and of
questionable cost effectiveness at depths greater than 150 feet
.Wireline coring techniques for sampling both unconsolidated
and consolidated formations often not available locally
.Difficult to identity aquifers
. Drilling fluid invasion of permeable zones may compromise
validity of subsequent monitoring well samples
41
-------
Pump
suction
Borehole wall -\ | | /~ Cuttings circulated to surface
through annular space
Tricone bit
Figure 29. Diagram of a direct rotary circulation system
(National Water Well Association of Australia, 1984).
Air Rotary Drilling
Air rotary drilling is very similar to direct mud rotary with
the exception that the circulation medium is air instead of water
or drilling mud. Air is compressed and circulated down through
the drill rods and up the open hole. The rotary drill bit is attached
to the lower end of the drill pipe, and the drill bit is advanced as
in direct mud rotary drilling. As the bit cuts into the formation,
cuttings are immediately removed from the bottom of the
borehole and transported to the surface by the air that is
circulating down through the drill pipe and up the annular space.
The circulating air also cools the bit. When there is no water
entering the borehole from the formation, penetration and
sampling may be enhanced by adding small quantities of water
and/or foaming surfactant. Foam very effectively removes the
cuttings and lubricates and cools the bit. However, the drilling
foam is not chemically inert and may react with the formation
water. Even if the foam is removed during the development
process, the representativeness of the ground-water quality
sample may be questioned.
As the air discharges cuttings at the surface, formation
samples can be collected. When the penetrated formation is dry,
samples are typically very fine-grained. This "dust" is represen-
tative of the formation penetrated, but is difficult to evaluate in
terms of the physical properties and characteristics of the
formation. However, when small quantities of water arc en-
countered during drilling or when water and surfactant are
added to the borehole to assist in the drilling process, the size of
the fragments that are discharged at the surface is much larger.
These larger fragments provide excellent quality samples that
are easier to interpret. Because the borehole is cleaned continu-
ously and all of the cuttings are discharged, there is minimal
opportunist y for recirculation and there is minimal contaminat-
ion of the cuttings by previously-drilled zones. Air discharged
from a compressor commonly contains hydrocarbon-related
contaminants. For this reason, it is necessary to install filters on
the discharge of the compressor.
When drilling through relatively dry formations, thick
water-bearing zones can easily be observed as drilling pro-
ceeds. However, thin water-bearing zones often are not iden-
tifiable because either the pressure of the air in the borehole
exceeds the hydraulic pressure of the water-bearing zone or the
combination and quantity of dust and air discharged is sufficient
to remove the small amount of moisture indicative of the thin
water-bearing zone. Where thin zones are anticipated, the
samples must be carefully evaluated and drilling sometimes
must be slowed to reduce absorption of the water by the dust. It
may be desirable to frequently stop drilling to allow ground
water to enter the open borehole. This technique applies only to
the first water-bearing zones encountered, because shallower
zones may contribute water to the open borehole. To prevent
shallow zones from producing water or to prevent cross con-
tamination, the shallower zones must be cased off. Identifica-
tion of both thin and thick water-bearing zones is extremely
important because this information assists greatly in the place-
ment of well intakes and/or in the selection of isolated zones for
packer tests.
In hard, abrasive, consolidated rock, a down-the-hole ham-
mer can be substituted for a roller cone bit to achieve better
penetration (Figure 31). With the down-the-hole drill, the
compressed air that is used to cool the bit is also used to actuate
and operate the down-the-hole hammer. Typical compressed
air requirements range from 100 pounds per square inch to as
much as 350 pounds per square inch for the latest generation of
down-the-hole hammers. When a down-the-hole hammer is
used, oil is required in the air stream to lubricate the hammer-
actuating device. For this reason, down-the-hole hammers
must be used with caution when constructing monitoring wells.
Figure 32 shows the range of materials in which roller cone bits
and down-the-hole pneumatic hammers operate most effi-
ciently.
Air rotary drilling is typically limited to drilling in consoli-
dated rock because of borehole instability problems. In air
rotary drilling, no casing or drilling fluid is added to support
the borehole walls, and the borehole is held open by stability of
the rock and/or the air pressure used during drilling. In uncon-
solidated materials, there is the tendency for the borehole to
collapse during drilling. Therefore, air rotary drilling in un-
consolidated formations is unreliable and poses a risk for
equipment. Where sufficient thicknesses of unconsolidated
deposits overlie a consolidated formation that will be drilled by
air rotary techniques, surface casing through the unconsoli-
dated material is installed by an alternative technique. Drilling
can then be accomplished using air with either a roller-cone bit
or down-the-hole hammer.
42
-------
Figure 30. Diagram of a roller cone bit.
Monitoring wells drilled by air rotary methods are typi-
tally installed as open-hole completions. Because the borehole
is uncased, the potential exists for cross connection between
water-bearing zones within the borehole. Futher, the recirculated
air effectively cleans cuttings from the borehole walls so that
the borehole is usually not coated with a wall cake such as
occurs with mud rotary drilling or with augering techniques.
This cleaner borehole wall increases the potential for cross
connection, but increases the effectiveness of well completion
and development Additionally, the air introduced during drilling
may strip volatile organics from the samples taken during
drilling and from the ground water in the vicinity of th
borehole. With time, the effects of airstripping will diminish
and disappear, but the time necessary for this recovery will vary
with the hydrogeologic conditions. The importance of these
factors needs to be evaluated before choosing the air rotary
drilling technique.
The diameter of the roller-cone or tricone bit used in air
rotary drilling is limited to approximately 12 inches, although
larger bits are available. For the down-the-hole hammer, the
practical limitation is 8-inch nominal diameter. There is no
significant depth limitation for monitoring well construction
with the air rotary technique, with the possible exception of
compressor capacity limits in deep holes with high water tables
and back Pressure.
A more complete list of applications and limitations of air
rotary drilling is found in Table 12.
43
-------
Cuttings discharge
through pipe
Air to actuate
hammer and
remove cuttings
t
I
t
• Hammer
- Button bit
Figure 31. Diagram of a down-the-hole hammer (after Layne.
Western Company, Inc., 1983).
Air Rotary With Casing Driver
This method is an adaptation of air rotary drilling that uses
a casing-driving technique in concert with air (or mud) rotary
drilling. The addition of the casing driver makes it possible to
use air rotary drilling techniques in unconsolidated formations.
The casing driver is installed in the mast of a top head drive air
rotary drilling rig. The casing can then be driven as the drill bit
is advanced (Figure 33).
The normal drilling procedure is to extend the drill bit 6 to
12 inches ahead of the casing. The distance that the drill bit can
be extended beyond the casing is primarily a function of the
stability of the borehole wall. It is also possible to drive the
casing ahead of the bit. This procedure can be performed in
unconsolidated formations where caving and an oversize
borehole are of concern. Once the casing has been driven
approximately one foot into the formation, the drill bit is used
to clean the material from inside the casing. This technique also
minimizes air or mud contact with the strata.
Where drilling through unconsolidated material and into
consolidated bedrock, the unconsolidated formation is drilled
with a drill bit as the casing is simultaneously advanced. When
the casing has been driven into the top of the bedrock, drilling
can proceed by the standard air rotary technique. The air rotary
with casing driver combination is particularly efficient where
drilling through the sand-gravel-silt-boulder-type materials
that commonly occur in glaciated regions. The sandy and/or
gravelly, unstable zones are supported by the casing while the
boulder and till zones are rapidly penetrated by the rotary bit.
Because the upper zones within the formation are cased-off as
the borehole is advanced, the potential for inter-aquifer cross-
contamination is minimized. The protective casing also permits
the collection of reliable formation samples because the entire
formation is cased except for the interval that is presently being
cut. An additional advantage of the drill-through casing driver
is that the same equipment can be used to drive the casing
upward to expose the well intake after the casing and well intake
have been installed in the borehole.
Water-bearing zones can be readily identified and water
yields can be estimated as drilling progresses. However, as with
the direct air rotary method, zones that have low hydrostatic
pressure may be inhibited from entering the borehole by the air
pressure exerted by the drilling process. Additionally, the dust
created as the formation is pulverized can serve to seal off these
zones and then these water-bearing zones may be overlooked.
For these reasons, it is necessary to drill slowly and carefully
and even occasionally to stop drilling where water-bearing
zones are indicated or anticipated.
A more complete list of applications and limitations of the
air rotary with casing driver method is found in Table 13.
Dual-Wall Reverse-Circulation
In dual-wall reverse-circulation rotary drilling, the circu-
lating fluid is pumped down between the outer casing and the
inner drill pipe, out through the drill bit and up the inside of the
drill pipe (Figure 34).
Table 12. Applications and Imitations of Air Rotary Drilling
Rapid drilling of semi-consolidated and consolidated rock
Good quality/reliable formation samples (particularly if small
quantities of water and surfactant are used)
Equipment generally available
Allows easy and quick identification of lithologic changes
Allows identification of most water-bearing zones
Allows estimation of yields in strong water-producing zones with
short 'down time"
Surface casing frequently required to protect top of hole
Drilling restricted to semi-consolidated and consolidated
formations
Samples reliable but occur as small particles that are
difficult to interpret
Drying effect of air may mask lower yield water
producing zones
Air stream requires contaminant filtration
Air may modify chemical or biological conditions. Recovery
time is uncertain.
44
-------
Well Drilling Selection Guide
Type of Formation
Geologic Origin fc_
Examples fr
Hardness »
Drilling Methods
Diameter
Depth
Igneous and Metamorphic
Granite Quartzite
Basall Gneiss Schist
Very hard to hard
1 ft
Downhole
hammer
Carbide
insert bit
*
• — Carbide tooth bi
Small (4-8iii)
Shallow (50-200ft)
Sedimentarv
Limestone Sandstone Shale
Hard to soft
4
(
Ro
;s »
n
V
•
v \
m
ary c
ary
I
rill
Clay Sand Gravel
Unconsolidated
*.
>
Small to medium (6-1 2in)
Shallow to deep (50- 1,000ft)
Figure 32. Range of applicability for various rotary drilling methods (Ingersoll-Rand, 1976).
The circuiationfluid used in the dual-wall reverse circula-
tion method can be either water or air. Air is the suggested
medium for the installation of monitoring wells, and, as such,
it is used in the development of the ratings in Appendix B. The
inner pipe or drill pipe rotates the bit, and the outer pipe acts as
casing. Similar to the air rotary with casing driver method, the
outer pipe: 1) stabilizes the borehole, 2) minimizes cross
contamination of cuttings and 3) minimizes interaquifer cross
contamination within the borehole.
The dual-wall reverse-circulation rotary method is one of
the better techniques available for obtaining representative and
continuous formation samples while drilling. If the drill bit is of
the roller-cone type, the formation that is being cut is located
only a few inches ahead of the double-wall pipe. The formation
cuttings observed at the surface represent no more than one foot
of the formation at any point in time. The samples circulated to
the surface are thus representative of a very short section of the
formation. When drilling with air, a very representative sample
of a thin zone can be obtained from the formation material and/
or the formation water. Water samples can only be obtained
where the formation has sufficient hydrostatic pressure to
overcome the air pressure and dust dehydration/sealing effects.
(Refer to the section on air rotary with casing driver for a more
complete discussion.)
Unconsolidated formations can be penetrated quite readily
with the dual-wall reverse-circulation method. Formations that
contain boulders or coarse gravelly materials that are otherwise
very difficult to drill can be relatively easily penetrated with this
technique. This increased efficiency is due to the ability of the
method to maximize the energy at the bottom of the borehole
while the dual-wall system eliminates problems with lost cir-
culation and/or borehole stability.
When drilling in hard rock a down-the-hole hammer can be
used to replace the tri-cone bit. When the down-the-hole hammer
is employed, air actuates the hammer by: 1) moving down
through the hammer, 2) moving back up the outside of the
hammer and 3) recentering the center drill pipe in a cross-over
45
-------
Continuous sample discharge
Air supply
Top-head drive
Mast
Casing driver
Discharge for cuttings
• Casing
• Drill pipe
Drive shoe
Drill bit
Figure 33. Diagram of a drill-through casing driver (Aardvark
Corporation, 1977),
channel just above the hammer. When drilling with the ham-
mer, the full length of the hammer is exposed below the
protective outer casing (approximately 4 to 5 feet). Thus the
uncased portion of the borehole is somewhat longer than when
drilling with a tri-cone bit This longer uncased interval results
in formation samples that are potentially representative of a
thicker section of the formation. Otherwise, the sampling and
representative quality of the cuttings are very similar to that of
a formation drilled with a tri-cone bit. This method was devel-
oped for and has been used extensively by minerals exploration
companies and has only recently been used for the installation
of monitoring wells, Depths in excess of 1000 feet can be
achieved in many formations.
When drilling with air, oil or other impurities in the air can
be introduced into the formation. Therefore, when drilling with
Top-head
drive
Outer pipe
Inner pipe
Figure 34. Diagram of dual-wall reverse-otrcuiation rotary
method (Driscoll, 1986).
air and a roller-cone bit, an in-line falter must be used to remove
oil or other impurities from the airstream. However, when using
a down-the-hole hammer, oil is required in the airstream to
lubricate the hammer. If oil or other air-introduced contami-
nants are of concern, the use of a down-the-hole hammer may
not be advised.
When the borehole has been advanced to the desired
monitoring depth, the monitoring well can be installed by
either 1) inserting a small diameter casing and well intake
through an open-mouth bit (Driscoll, 1986) or 2) removing the
outer casing prior to the installation of the monitoring well and
installing the monitoring well in the open borehole. When
installing a casing through the bit, the maximum diameter
casing that can be installed is approximately 4 inches. This is
controlled by the 10-inch maximum borehole size that is readily
available with existing drill pipe and the maximum diameter
opening in the bit. When installing a casing in the open bore-
hole, the borehole must be very stable to permit the open-hole
completion.
46
-------
Table 13. Applications and Limitations of Air Rotary with Casing Driver Drilling
Applications
Limitations
Rapid drilling of unconsolidated sands, silts and days
Drilling in alluvial material (including boulder formations)
Casing supports borehole thereby maintaining borehole integrity
and minimizing inter-aquifer cross contamination
Eliminates circulation problems common with direct mud rotary
method
Good formation samples
Minimal formation damage as casing pulled back (smearing of
clays and sits can be anticipated)
• Thin, low pressure waterbearing zones easily overlooked if
drilling not stopped at appropriate places to observe whether
or not water levels are recovering
• Samples pulverized as in all rotary drilling
• Air may modify chemical or biological conditions. Recovery
time is uncertain
A more complete list of applications and limitations of the
dual-wall reverse-circulation technique is found in Table 14.
Cable Tool Drilling
Cable tool drilling is the oldest of all the available modem
drilling technologies. Prior to the development of direct mud
rotary, it was the standard technology used for almost all forms
of drilling.
In cable tool drilling, the drill bit is attached to the lower
portion of the weighted drill stem that, in turn, is attached by
means of a rope socket to the rope or cable (Figure 35). The
cable and drill stem are suspended from the mast of the drill rig
through a pulley. The cable runs through another pulley that is
attached to an eccentric "walking or spudding beam. " The
walking beam is actuated by the engine of the drilling rig. As the
walking beam moves up and down, the bit is alternately raised
and dropped. This "spudding action" can successfully penetrate
all types of geological formations.
When drilling in hard rock formations, the bit pounds a
hole into the rock by grinding cuttings from the formation. The
cuttings are periodically excavated from the borehole by re-
moving the drill bit and inserting a bailer (Figure 36). The bailer
is a bucket made from sections of thin-wall pipe with a valve on
the bottom that is actuated by the weight of the bailer. The bailer
is run into the borehole on a separate line. The bailer will not
function unless there is sufficient water in the borehole to slurry
the mixture of cuttings in water. If enough water is present the
bailer picks up the cuttings through the valve on the bottom of
the bailer and is hoisted to the surface. The cuttings are dis-
charged from either the top or bottom of the bailer, and a sample
of the cuttings can be collected. If the cuttings are not removed
from the borehole, the bit is constantly redrilling the same
material, and the drilling effort becomes very inefficient.
When drilling unconsolidated deposits comprised prima-
rily of silt and clay, the drilling action is very similar to that
described in the previous paragraph. Water must be added to the
borehole if the formations encountered during drilling do not
produce a sufficient quantity of water to slurry the mud and silt.
If the borehole is not stable, casing must be driven as the bit
advances to maintain the wall of the borehole.
When drilling unconsolidated deposits comprised prim-
arily of water-bearing sands and gravels, an alternate and more
effective drilling technique is available for cable tool opera-
tions. In the "drive and bail" technique, casing is driven into the
sand and gravel approximately 3 to 5 feet and the bailer is used
to bail the cuttings from within the casing. These cuttings
provide excellent formation samples because the casing serves,
in effect, as a large thin-wall sampler. Although the sample is
"disturbed," the sample is representative because the bailer has
the capability of picking up all sizes of particles within the
formation.
When drilling by the drive and bail technique, "heaving" of
material from the bottom of the casing upward may present a
problem. When heaving occurs, samples are not representative
of the material penetrated by the casing. Instead, samples
represent a mixture of materials from the zone immediately
beneath the drill pipe. Heaving occurs when the hydrostatic
pressure on the outside of the casing exceeds the pressure on the
inside of the casing. The heaving is exacerbated by the action of
the drill stem that is suspended in the borehole as the pipe is
driven and by the action of the bailer that is used to take the
samples. If the bailer is lifted or "spudded rapidly, suction is
developed that can pull the material from beneath the casing up
into the casing. This problem is particularly prevalent when the
drill advances from a dense material into relatively unconsoli-
dated sand and gravel under greater hydrostatic pressure.
Several techniques have been developed to offset the
problem of heaving. These techniques include:
1) maintaining the casing full of water as it is driven
and as the well is bailed. The column of water in
the casing creates a higher hydrostatic head within
the casing than is present in the formation;
2) maintaining a "plug" inside the casing as the
samples are taken with the bailer. This plug is
created by collecting samples with the bailer
Table 14. Applications and Limitations of Dual-Wall Reverse-Circulation Rotary Drilling
Applications Limitations
Very rapid drilling through both unconsolidated and
consolidated formations
Allows continuous sampling in all types of formations
Very good representative samples can be obtained with minimal
risk of contamination of sample and/or water-bearing zone
In stable formations, wells with diameters as large as 6 inches
can be installed in open hole completions
Limited borehole size that limits diameter of monitoring wells
In unstable formations, well diameters are limited to
approximately 4 inches
Equipment availability more common in the southwest
Air may modify chemical or biological conditions; recovery
time is uncertain
Unable to install filter pack unless completed open hole
47
-------
Crown
sheave
Shock -
absorber
Casing and sand
line sheaves
Spudding beam
Heel sheave
Pitman
Tool
guide
Drilling
cable
Swivel
socket
Drill
stem
Operating
levers
Drill bit
Figure 35. Diagram of a cable tool drilling system (Buckeye Drill Company/Bucyrus-Erie Company, 1982).
•Truck mounting
bracket
between 1 and 3 feet above the bottom of the
casing. The plug maintained in the bottom of the
"borehole" offsets heaving when the pressure
differential is low;
3) overdriving the casing through the zone that has
the tendency to heave; and
4) adding drilling mud to the borehole until the
weight of the mud and slurried material in the
casing exceed the hydrostatic pressure of the
heaving zone. This fourth option is the least
desirable because it adds drilling mud to the
borehole.
If it is necessary to maintain a slurry in the casing in order
to control heaving problems, it is still possible to collect both
disturbed and undisturbed samples from beneath the casing by
inserting smaller-diameter drill rods and samplers inside the
casing at selected intervals.
48
-------
Cable tool drilling has become less prevalent in the last 25
years because the rate of formation penetration is slower than
with either rotary techniques in hard consolidated rock or
augering techniques in unconsolidated formations. Because
cable tool drilling is much slower, it is generally more expen-
sive. Cable tool drilling is still important in monitoring well
applications because of the versatility of the method. Cable tool
rigs can be used to drill both the hardest and the softest
formations. Cable tool rigs can drill boreholes with a diameter
suitable to fulfill the needs of a monitoring well or monitoring
well network. There is no significant depth limitation for the
installation of monitoring wells.
When comparing cable tool to other drilling technologies,
cable tool drilling may be the desired method. In a carefully
drilled cable tool borehole, thin individual zones and changes
in formations are often more easily identified than with alter-
native technologies. For example, smearing along sidewalls in
unconsolidated formations is generally less severe and is thin-
ner than with hollow-stem augering. Therefore, the prospect of
a successful completion in a thin water-bearing zone is gener-
ally enhanced.
A more complete listing of advantages and disadvantages
of cable tool drilling is found in Table 15.
Other Drilling Methods
There are two other drilling techniques that are commonly
available to install monitoring wells: 1) bucket auger and 2)
reverse circulation rotary. Bucket augers are primarily used for
large-diameter borings associated with foundations and build-
ing structures. Reverse-circulation rotary is used primarily for
the installation of large-diameter deep water wells.
While either of these technologies can be used for the
installation of monitoring wells, the diameters of the boreholes
and the size of the required equipment normally preclude them
from practical monitoring well application. Unless an extraor-
dinarily large diameter monitoring well is being installed, the
size of the zone disturbed by the large diameter hole excavated
by either of these techniques severely compromises the data
acquisition process that is related to the sampling of the moni-
toring wells. While either of these techniques have possible
application to monitoring well installation, they are not consid-
ered to be valid for regular application.
Drilling Fluids
Prior to the development of rotary drilling, water and
natural clay were added to the borehole during cable tool
drilling to: 1) cool and lubricate the bit, 2) slurry the cuttings for
bailing and 3) generally assist in the drilling process. With the
development of rotary drilling, the use of drilling fluid became
increasingly important. In rotary drilling, the drilling fluid 1)
cools and lubricates the bit, 2) removes the cuttings and 3)
simultaneously stabilizes the hole. Drilling fluid thus makes it
possible to drill to much greater depths much more rapidly. As
fluid rotary drilling programs became increasingly sophisti-
cated, it became possible either to temporarily suspend cuttings
in the mud column when the mud pump was not operating, or,
under appropriate circumstances, to cause the cuttings to drop
out in the mud pit when the cuttings reached the surface. These
improvements served not only to enhance the efficiency of the
drilling operation, but also to improve the reliability of the
geologic information provided by the cuttings.
Today, the fluid system used in mud rotary drilling is no
longer restricted to the use of water and locally-occurring
natural clays. Systems are now available that employ a wide
variety of chemical/oil/water-base and water-base fluids with a
wide range of physical characteristics created by additives. The
predominant additives include sodium bentonite and barium
sulfates, but a variety of other chemicals are also used. This
drilling fluid technology was initially developed to fulfill the
deep-drilling requirements of the petroleum industry and is not
generally applied to monitoring well installations.
Influence of Drilling Fluids on Monitoring Well
Construction
Monitoring well construction is typically limited to the use
of simple water-based drilling fluids. This limitation is imposed
by the necessity not to influence the ground-water quality in the
area of the well. Even when water-based fluids are used, many
problems are still created or exacerbated by the use of drilling
fluids. These problems include: 1) fluid infiltration/flushing of
the intended monitoring zone, 2) well development difficulties
(particularly where an artificial filter pack has been installed)
and 3) chemical, biological and physical reactivity of the
drilling fluid with the indigenous fluids in. the ground.
As drilling fluid is circulated in the borehole during drilling
operations, a certain amount of the drilling fluid escapes into the
formations being penetrated. The escape, or infiltration into the
formation, is particularly pronounced in more permeable zones.
Because these more permeable zones are typically of primary
interest in the monitoring effort, the most "damage" is inflicted
on the zones of greatest concern. If the chemistry of the water
in the formation is such that it reacts with the infiltrate, then
subsequent samples taken from this zone will not accurately
reflect the conditions that are intended to be monitored. At-
tempts to remove drilling fluids from the formation are made
during the well development process. Water is typically re-
moved in sufficient quantities to try to recover all the infiltrate
that may have penetrated into the formation. When a sufficient
quantity of water has been removed during development, the
effects of flushing are arbitrarily considered to be minimized.
Table 15. Applications and Limitations of Cable Tool Drilling
Applications
Limitations
Drilling in all types of geologic formations
Almost any depth and diameter range
Ease ot monitoring well installation
Ease and practicality of well development
Excellent samples of coarse-grained materials
Drilling relatively slow
Heaving of unconsolidated materials must be controlled
Equipment availability more common in central, north cen
and northeast sections of the United States
49
-------
Most monitoring wells are typically 2 to 4 inches in
diameter. They are frequently surrounded by a filter pack to
stabilize the formation and to permit the procurement of good
ground-water samples. Because of the small well diameter, it is
very difficult, and often not possible, to fully develop the
drilling mud from the interface between the outside of the filter
pack and the inside of the natural formation. Failure to fully
remove this mudcake can interfere with the quality of the
samples being obtained for a substantial period of time.
In practice, when ground-water sampling is undertaken,
samples are usually collected and analyzed in the field for
certain key parameters, including specific conductance, tem-
perature and pH. Water is discharged from the well and repeated
measurements are taken until the quality of the water being
sampled has stabilized. When this "equilibrium" has been
achieved and/or a certain number of casing volumes of water
have been removed, the samples collected are commonly
considered to be representative of the indigenous quality of the
ground water. It is assumed that the drilling fluid filtrate no
longer impacts the results of the sample quality. This is not
necessarily the case. If, for example, the chemical reactions that
took place between the drilling fluid and formation water(s)
resulted in the precipitation of some constituents, then the
indigenous water moving toward the well can redissolve some
of the previously-precipitated constituents and give a false
result to the sample. Theoretically, at some point in time this
dissolution will be completed and the samples will become
valid. However, there is currently no reliable method in practice
that postulates the time frame required before reliable quality is
attainable.
Biologic activity induced by the introduction of the drilling
fluid may have a similar reaction. In particular, the use of
organic drilling fluids, such as polymeric additives, has the
potential for enhancing biologic activity. Polymeric additives
include the natural organic colloids developed from the guar
plant that are used for viscosity control during drilling. Biologic
activity related to the decomposition of these compounds can
cause along-term variation in the quality of the water sampled
from the well.
The use of sodium montmorillonite (bentonite) can also
have a deleterious long-term impact on water quality. If the
sodium-rich montmorillonite is not fully removed from the well
during development, constituents contained in the ground wa-
ter being monitored will come in contact with the montmorillo-
nite. When this happens, the tendency is for both organic
molecules with polar characteristics and inorganic cations to be
attracted to positions within the sodium montmorillonite struc-
ture. This substitution results in the release of excess sodium
ions and the retention of both selected organic molecules and
cations. Organic molecules and cations that might otherwise be
indicative of contamination can be removed from the sample
and possibly be re-dissolved at an undefined rate into subse-
quent samples.
Drilling Fluid Characteristics
The principal properties of water-based drilling fluids are
shown in Table 16. Selected properties are discussed in this
section. Monitoring well construction typically starts by using
only the simplest drilling fluid- -water; however, water should
only be used when necessary. Any water added as a drilling
fluid to a monitoring well should be the best quality of water that
is available. The chemical and bacteriological quality of this
water must be determined by laboratoy analyses in order to
identify potential interference with substances being monit-
ored. As this "clean" water is circulated in the borehole, the
water picks up clay and silt that form a natural drilling mud.
During this process, both the weight and viscosity of the drilling
fluid increase. The degree of change in these properties depends
on the nature of the geologic formations being penetrated. It is
possible to attain a maximum weight of approximately 11
pounds per gallon when drilling in natural clays. The same
maximum weight can also be achieved by artificially adding
natural clays or bentonite to make a heavier drilling mud where
the formation does not natural] y have these minerals.
Where additional weight is needed to maintain stability of
the borehole, heavier additives are required. The most common
material used for drilling mud weight control is barite (barium
sulfate). Barite has an average specific gravity of approximately
4.25; the specific gravity of typical clay additives approximates
2.65. Figure 37 shows the range of drilling fluid densities that
can be obtained by using a variety of different drilling additives.
When the weight of the drilling fluid substantially exceeds
the natural hydrostatic pressure exerted by the formation being
drilled, there is an excessive amount of water loss from the
drilling fluid into the formation penetrated. This maximizes the
filtrate invasion and consequently maximizes the adverse im-
pact of filtrate invasion on the reliability of water-quality
samples collected from the monitoring well.
Another important property of a drilling fluid is viscosity.
Viscosity is the resistance offered by the drilling fluid to flow.
In combination with the velocity of the circulated fluid, viscosity
controls the ability of the fluid to remove cuttings from the
borehole. In monitoring wells where water is the primary
drilling fluid, the viscosity is the result of the interaction of
water with the particulate matter that is drilled. Viscosity is also
affected by the interaction of water with the clays that are
sometimes added during the drilling process. Sodium montmo-
rillonite (sodium bentonite) is the constituent most often added
to increase viscosity.
Viscosity has no relationship to density. In the field,
viscosity is measured by the time required for a known quantity
of fluid to flow through an orifice of special dimensions. The
instrument used for this measurement is called a Marsh Funnel.
The relative viscosity of the drilling mud is described as the
Marsh Funnel viscosity, in seconds. Table 17 presents the
approximate Marsh Funnel viscosities required for drilling in
typical unconsolidated materials. These typical values are based
on the assumption that the circulating mud pump provides an
adequate uphole velocity to clean the cuttings from the borehole
at these viscosities. For comparison, the Marsh Funnel viscos-
ity of clear water at 70"F is 26 seconds.
Table 16. Principal Properties of Water-Based Drillng Fluids
(Driscoll, 1986)
Density (weight)
Viscosity
yield point
Gel strength
Fluid-ioss-controi effectiveness
Lubricity (lubrication capacity)
50
-------
^>
A
IV
y
^x Flapper
valve
(b)
Figure 36. Diagrams of two types of bailers:
a) dart valve and b) flat bottom.
Table 17. Approximate Marsh Funnel Viscosities Required for
Drilling in Typical Types of Unconsolidated Materials
(Driscoll, 1986)
Appropriate Marsh Funnel
Material Drilled Viscosity (seconds)
Fine sand
Medium sand
Coarse sand
Gravel
Coarse gravel
35-45
45-55
55-65
65-75
75-85
Clays are frequently a mixture of illite, chlorite, kaolinite
and mixed-layer clays. These minerals all have a relatively low
capability to expand when saturated. The reason that sodium
montmorillonite is so effective in increasing viscosity is be-
cause of its crystalline layered structure; its bonding character-
istics; and the ease of hydration of the sodium cation. Figure 38
demonstrates the variation in the viscosity building character-
istics of a variety of clays. Wyoming bentonite (a natural
sodium-rich montmorillonite) is shown at the extreme left.
The impact of the mix water on sodium bentonite is
indicated by Figure 39. This figure shows the viscosity varia-
tion that results from using soft water versus hard water in
drilling mud preparation. Sodium montmorillonite is most
commonly used as the viscosity-building clay. However, in
hard water the calcium and magnesium ions replace the sodium
cation in the montmorillonite structure. As a consequence, a
much lower viscosity is obtained for a given quantity of solids
added. As previously discussed, this sodium cation replacement
is similar to the activity that occurs in the subsurface when
bentonitic materials are left in the proximity of the well. These
materials have the capacity to prevent ions from reaching the
borehole and to release them slowly back into the ground water
at an indeterminate rate. This process can have a profound
influence on the quality of the ground-water samples collected
from the monitoring well.
The loss of fluid from the borehole into permeable zones
during drilling occurs because the hydrostatic pressure in the
borehole exceeds that of the formation being penetrated. As
fluid moves from the borehole into the lower pressure zones,
fine particulate matter that has been incorporated during the
drilling operation, plus any clay additives that have been added
to the drilling fluid, are deposited in the pore space of the zone
being infiltrated. When this happens, a "filter cake" is formed
on the borehole wall. Where a good quality bentonitic drilling
mud additive is being used, this filter cake can be highly
impermeable and quite tough. These characteristics minimize
filtrate invasion into the formation, but make it difficult to
develop these clays out of the zone penetrated.
Yield point and gel strength are two additional properties
that are considered in evaluating the characteristics of drilling
mud. Yield point is a measure of the amount of pressure, after
a shutdown, that must be exerted by the pump upon restarting,
in order to cause the drilling fluid to start to flow. Gel strength
is a measure of capability of the drilling fluid to maintain
suspension of particulate matter in the mud column when the
pump is shut down. There is a close relationship between
viscosity, yield point and gel strength. In monitoring well
installation these properties are rarely controlled because the
control of these properties requires the addition of additives that
can impact the quality of the water produced by the completed
well. They are important, however, in evaluating the reliability
of samples taken from the mud stream. Where drilling fluid
quality is uncontrolled, ditch samples are generally unreliable.
Mud-Based Applications
It is desirable to install monitoring wells with the cleanest,
clearest drilling water that is available. In monitoring well
applications, the properties related to mud weight and the
properties that relate to flow characteristics are only controlled
under exceptional conditions. This control is usually exercised
only on relatively deep boreholes or boreholes with moderately
large diameters.
When drilling using either cable tool or hollow-stem
augering techniques, it is sometimes necessary to add water to
the borehole in order to effectively continue drilling. The
addition of water maybe required to: 1) stabilize the borehole,
2) improve the cutting action of the bit or 3) enable the driller
to remove the cuttings from the borehole. With drive-and-bail
and hollow-stem auger techniques, it maybe necessary to add
51
-------
Weight of drilling fluid.lb/gal
10
15
| Stiff foam
I Wet foam
Water
Maximum practical density using polymers
Polymeric drilling fluid saturated with NaCI
Maximum practical density using bentonite
Polymeric drilling fluid saturated with CaCI
Weighted bentonite drilling fluid using barite
0 600 1,200
Weight of drilling fluid,kg/nf
Figure 37. Practical drilling fluid densities (Driscoll, 1986).
1,800
2,400
water to the borehole to minimize heaving of the formation
upward into the casing or hollow stem. When the zone imme-
diately below the augers or the casing heaves, the samples
collected from this zone are considered disturbed and are not
representative of the natural undisturbed formation.
When drilling fluid is added during either cable tool
drilling or hollow-stem augering, the effectiveness of the water
is enhanced by the addition of bentonite to the drilling fluid. The
bentonite is added to the borehole for formation stabilization.
When either clean water or clean water plus additives are added
to the borehole, the problems of flushing, potential contamina-
tion and water-quality modification are the same as when using
fluid rotary drilling. For these reasons, it is suggested that
addition of drilling fluid additives and/or even clean water be
avoided when using cable tool or hollow-stem augers if at all
possible. If it is anticipated that the addition of fluids will be
necessary to drill with either cable tool or hollow-stem augers,
it is suggested that alternative drilling techniquesbe considered.
Air-Based Applications
In addition to water-based drilling fluids, air-based drilling
fluids are also used. There are a variety of air-based systems as
indicated in Table 18. When using air-based drilling fluids, the
same restrictions apply as when using water-based drilling
Table 18. Drilling Fluid Option* when Drilling with Air (after
Driscoll, 1986)
• Air Alone
* Air Mist
• Air plus a small amount of water/perhaps a small amount of
surfactant
• Air Foam
• Stable foam - air plus surfactant
• Stiff foam - air, surfactant plus polymer or bentonite
• Aerated mud/water base - drilling fluid plus air
fluids. When a monitoring well is drilled using additives other
than dry air, flushing, potential contamination and water-
quality modification are all of concern. Even with the use of dry
air, there is the possibility that modification of the chemical
environment surrounding the borehole may occur due to changes
in the oxidation/reduction potential induced by aeration. This
may cause stripping of volatile organics from formation samples
and ground water in the vicinity of the borehole. With time, this
effect will diminish and disappear, but the time necessary for
this to occur varies with the hydrogeologic conditions.
63.7
67.5
Weight, Ib/ft3
71.2 75.0 78.7 82.5 86.2 90.0
8.5
9.0
Weight, Ib/gal
9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 120
60- i'
!20
. Premium
10 15 2Q 2530 35 40. 45 §Q
1 nn Percent solids by weight
" 200 175 5040 30 25 201816 14 12 10 9 8~
Yield (15-centipoise drilling fluid), barrels per ton
Figure 38. Viscosity-building characteristics of drilling clays
(after Petroleum Extension Service, 1960).
52
-------
Bentoniie
Complete
mixing
Incomplete
mixing
u
Higher viscosity per Ib of clay solids
Lower viscosity par Ib of clay solids
Jj
li
V
Deflocculated
• Low gel strength
• Lowest rate of filtration
• Firm filter cake
Flocculated
• Progressive gel strength
• High rate of filtration
• Soft filter cake
Deflocculated
• Low gel strength
• Low rate of filtration
• Firm filter cake
Flocculated
• Sudden, non-progressive
gel strength
• Highest rate of filtration
• Soft filter cake
Figure 39. Schematic of the behavior of clay particles when mixed into water (Driscoll, 1986).
Where dry air is being used, a filter must be placed in the
discharge line to remove lubricating oil. Because a down-the-
hole hammer cannot be used without the presence of oil in the
air stream, this particular variety of dry-air drilling cannot be
used without the danger of contaminating the formation with
lubricating oil.
Monitoring wells can be installed in hard rock formations
using air as the circulation medium and employing roller-cone
bits. Air can also be used successfully in unconsolidated format-
ions when applied in conjunction with a casing hammer or a
dual-wall casing technique. For effective drilling, the air supply
must be sufficient to lift the cuttings from the bottom of the
borehole, up through the annular space and to the discharge
point at the surface. An uphole velocity of 5000 to 7000 feet per
minute is desirable for deep boreholes drilled at high penetra-
tion rates.
Soil Sampling and Rock Coring Methods
It is axiomatic that "any sample is better than no sample;
and no sample is ever good enough." Thus, if there are no
samples except those collected from the discharge of a direct
rotary fluid drilled hole or those scraped from the cutting head
or lead auger of a solid core auger, then these samples will be
collected and analyzed to the best of the ability of the person
supervising the operation. In general, however, it can be stated
that in a monitoring well installation program these types of
samples are not sufficient.
When evaluating the efficiency of a sampling program, the
objectives must be kept in mind. Where formation boundaries
must be identified in order to establish screened intervals,
continuous samples are important. If identification of isolated
zones with thin interfingers of sand and gravel in a clay matrix
is important for the monitoring program, then the samples must
allow identification of discrete zones within the interval being
penetrated. If laboratory tests will be performed on the samples,
then the samples must be of sufficient quality and quantity for
laboratory testing. Specific laboratory tests require that samples
be undisturbed; other tests permit the use of disturbed samples.
The sample program must take these requirements into account.
Table 19 demonstrates the characteristics of the sampling
methods available for the drilling techniques that are most
53
-------
Table 19. Characteristices of Common Formation-Sampling Methods
Type of
Formation
Sample Collection
Method
Sample
Quality
Potential for
Continuous
Sample
Collection
Samples
Suitable
for Lab
Teats
Discrete
Zones
identifiable
Increasing
Reliability
Unconsolidated
Consolidated
Solid core auger Poor No
Ditch (direct rotary) Poor Yes
Air rotary with casing driver Fair Yes
Dual-wall reverse circulation
rotary Good Yes
Piston samplers Good No
Split spoon and thin-wail
samplers Good Yes
Special samplers
(Dennison, Vicksburg) Good Yes
Cores Good Yes
Ditch (direct rotary) Poor Yes
Surface (dry air) Poor Yes
Surface (water/foam) Fair Yes
Cores (wireline or
conventional) Good Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
frequently employed in the installation of monitoring wells.
The table is arranged such that the general overall reliability of
the samples increases downward in the table for both unconsoli-
dated and consolidated materials. The least favorable type of
sampling is the scraping of samples from the outside of the
flights of solid-flight augers. This sampling method: 1) permits
only discontinuous sampling, 2) does not allow identification of
discrete zones, 3) provides no sample suitable for laboratory
testing and 4) generally provides unreliable sample quality. It
can also be seen from Table 19 that split-spoon and thin-wall
sampling techniques are the minimum techniques required to
obtain: 1) good sample quality, 2) continuous sampling, 3)
samples suitable for laboratory testing and 4) samples that
allow the identification of discrete zones.
Split-spoon sampling has become the standard for obtain-
ing samples in unconsolidated materials by which other tech-
niques are compared. Split-spoon samples are "driven" to
collect disturbed samples; thin-wall samples are "pressed" to
collect undisturbed samples. Undisturbed samples cannot be
taken using driving, rotational or vibratory techniques in un-
consolidated materials. Split-spoon and thin-wall sampling
techniques are the primary techniques that are used to obtain
data for monitoring well installation.
Sample description is as important as sample collection. It
is often difficult to collect good formation samples of non-
cohesive materials because the fine, non-cohesive particles are
frequently lost during the sampling process. The person using
and describing such sampling data must make an on-site,
sample-by-sample determination of sample reliability if the
data are to be used in a meaningful manner. Another sampling
bias is that particulate material with an effective diameter
greater than one-third of the inside diameter of the sampler
frequently cannot be collected. It is not unusual for a single
large gravel or small cobble to be caught at the bottom of the
sampler and no sample at all recovered from a sampler run. It
is also possible in a sequence of alternating saturated clay/silt
and sand to "plug" the sampler with the clay/silt materials and
to drive through the sands without any indication of sand. It is
also common for the sample to be compacted so that if a 2-foot
sampler is driven completely into the sediments, only 1.5 feet
or less may actually be recovered.
It must be stressed that regardless of the sampling equip-
ment used, the final results frequently depend on the subjective
judgment of the person describing the samples. Therefore, in
order to properly screen and develop a well in a potentially
contaminated zone, it is often necessary to employ auxiliary
techniques and substantial experience.
Split-Spoon Samplers
Split-spoon sampling techniques were developed to meet
the requirements of foundation engineering. The common
practice in foundation evaluation is to collect 18-inch samples
at 5-foot internals as the borehole is advanced. The split-spoon
sampler is attached to the end of the drill rods and lowered to the
bottom of the borehole where it rests on top of fresh undisturbed
formation. In order to obtain valid samples, the bottom of the
borehole must be clean and the formation to be sampled must
be fresh and undisturbed. It is, therefore, easy to see why: 1) the
difficulties of a heaving formation must be overcome prior to
sampling and 2) a good sampling program can only be con-
ducted in a stabilized borehole.
A split-spoon sampler, as shown in Figure 40, is of standard
dimensions and is driven by a 140-pound weight dropped
through a 30-inch interval. The procedure for collecting split-
spoon samples and the standard dimensions for samplers are
described in ASTM D1586 (American Society for Testing and
Materials, 1984). The number of blows required to drive the
split-spoon sampler provides an indication of the compaction/
density of the soils being sampled. Because only 18-inch
intervals are sampled out of every 5 feet penetrated, drilling
characteristics (i.e. rate of penetration, vibrations, stability,
etc.) of the formation being penetrated are also used to infer
54
-------
Head assembly
Split barrel
Spacer
Liner
Shoe
Figure 40. Diagram of a split-spoon sampler (Mobile Drilling
Company, 1982).
characteristics of unsampled material. "Continuous" samples
can also be taken with the split-spoon method by augering or
drilling to the bottom of the previously-sampled interval and
continuously repeating the operation. In order to obtain more
accurate "N" values, a better approach is to attempt to collect
two samples every five feet. This minimizes collection of
samples in the disturbed zone in front of the bit. Continuous
sampling is more time consuming, but is often the best way to
obtain good stratigraphic data in unconsolidated sediments.
Table 20 shows the penetration characteristics of a variety
of unconsolidated materials. The samples collected by split-
spoon sampler are considered to be "disturbed" samples. They
are, therefore, unsuitable for running certain laboratory tests,
such as permeability.
Table 20. Standard Penetration Test Correlation Chart (After
Acker, 1974)
Soil Type
Designation
Bfows/Foot*
Sand
and
silt
Clay
Medium
Dense
, Very Dense
Very Soft
soft
Medium
Stiff
{ Hard
0-10
11-30
31-50
>50
<2
3-5
6-15
1-25
>25
• Assumes: a) 2-inch outside diameter by 1 3/8 Inch inside diameter
sampler
b) 140-pound hammer falling through 30 inches
Thin-Wall Samplers
Work performed by Hvorslev (1949) and others have
shown that if relatively undisturbed samples are to be obtained,
it is imperative that the thickness of the wall of the sampling
tube be less than 2.5 percent of the total outside diameter of the
sampling tube. In addition, the ratio of the total area of the
sampler outside diameter to the wall thickness area (area ratio)
should be as small as possible. An area ratio of approximately
10 percent is the maximum acceptable ratio for thin-wall
samplers; hence, the designation "thin-wall" samplers. Because
the split-spoon sampler must be driven to collect samples, the
wall thickness of the sampler must be structurally sufficient to
withstand the driving forces. Therefore, the wall thickness of a
split spoon sampler is too great for the collection of undisturbed
samples.
The standard practice for collecting thin-wall samples,
commonly referred to as Shelby tube samples, requires placing
the thin-wall sampling tube at the end of the sampling drill rods.
The sampler and rods are lowered to the bottom of the borehole
just as is done with the split-spoon sampler. Instead of driving
the sampler into the ground, the weight of the drill rig is placed
on the sampler and it is pressed into place. This sampling
procedure is described in detail in ASTM D1587 (American
Society for Testing and Materials, 1983). A typical thin-wall
sampler is shown in Figure41.
The requirement that the area ratio be as small as possible
resents a serious limitation on obtaining undisturbed samples
in compact sediments. A thin-wall sampler may not have
sufficient structural strength to penetrate these materials. A
standard 2-inch inside diameter thin-wall sampler will fre-
quently collapse without satisfactorily collecting a sample in
soils with "N" values of 30 or greater. "N" values are a standard
method of comparing relative density as derived from blow
counts and are explained in ASTM D1586 (American Society
for Testing and Materials, 1984).
55
-------
-^-~ - Cap screw
• Head assembly
• Cap screw
•Tube
Figure 41. Diagram of a thin-wall sampler (Acker Drill Company,
inc., 1985).
Specialized Soil Samplers
Many special-function samplers have been developed to
deal with special conditions. These include: 1) structurally
strong thin-wall samplers that collect "undisturbed" samples, 2)
large-diameter samplers that collect coarse sand and gravel for
gradation analyses and 3) piston samplers that collect samples
in heaving sands. Two good examples of the reinforced-type
design are the Vicksburg sampler and the Dennison sampler, as
shown in Figures 42a and 42b. Both samplers were developed
by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and are so named
for the districts in which they were first developed and used.
The Vicksburg sampler is a 5.05-inch inside diameter by 5.25-
inch outside diameter sampler that qualifies as a thin-wall
sampler but is structurally much stronger than a Shelby tube.
The Dennison sampler is a double-tube core design with a thin
inner tube that qualifies as a thin-wall sampler. The outer tube
permits penetration in extremely stiff deposits or highly ce-
mented unconsolidated materials while the inner tube collects
a thin-wall sample.
Examples of piston samplers are the internal sleeve piston
sampler developed by Zapico et al. (1987) and the wireline
piston sampler described by Leach et al. (1988) (Figures 43 and
44). Both samplers have been designed to be used with a hinged
"clam-shell" device on the cutting head of a hollow-stem auger
(Figure 45). The clam shell has been used in an attempt to: 1)
improve upon a non-retrievable knock-out plug technique, 2)
simplify sample retrieval and 3) increase the reliability of the
sampling procedure in heaving sand situations. The Zapico et
al. (1987) device requires the use of water or drilling mud for
hydrostatic control while the Leach et al. (1988) device permits
the collection of the sample without the introduction of any
external fluid. The limitation of using this technique is that only
one sample per borehole can be collected because the clam shell
device will not close after the sampler is inserted through the
opening. This means that although sample reliability is good,
the cost per sample is high.
In both split-spoon and thin-wall sampling, it is common
for a portion of the sample to be lost during the sampling
process. One of the items to be noted in the sample description
is the percent recovery, or the number of inches that are actually
recovered of the total length that was driven or pressed. To help
retain fine sand and gravel and to prevent the sample from being
lost back into the borehole as the sample is removed, a "basket"
or a "retainer" is placed inside the split-spoon sampler. Figure
46 shows the configuration of four commercially-available
types of sample retainers. A check valve is also usually installed
above the sampler to relieve hydrostatic pressing during sample
collection and to prevent backflow and consequent washing
during withdrawal of the sampler.
Except for loss of sample during collection, it is possible to
collect continuous samples with conventional split-spoon or
thin-wall techniques. These involve: 1) collecting a sample, 2)
removing the sampler from the borehole, 3) drilling the sampled
interval, 4) reinserting the sampler and 5) repeating the process.
This effort is time consuming and relatively expensive, and it
becomes increasingly expensive in lost time to remove and
reinsert the sampler and rods as the depths exceed 100 feet.
To overcome this repeated effort, continuous samplers
have been developed. One such system is shown in Figure 47.
A continuous sample is taken by attaching a 5-foot long thin-
wall tube in advance of the cutting head of the hollow-stem
auger. The tube is held in place by a specially designed latching
mechanism that permits the sample to be retracted by wire line
when full and replaced with a new tube. A ball-bearing fitting
in the latching mechanism permits the auger flights to be rotated
without rotation of the sampling tube. Therefore, the sampling
tube is forced downward into the ground as the augers are
rotated.
56
-------
M 1/2
-5.05"-
— 5.25"-
Drill rod
Air hose
N" rod coupling
Plug
Sampler head
Clamp
Wrench holes
Adapter
-Allen set
screws
-Rubber gasket
-Sampling tube
fct
• Outer head
• Outer tube
. Bearing
• Inner head
- Cotter pm
• Check valve
• Inner tube
Liner
— Sawtooth bit
- Basket retainer
•5"
(a)
(b)
Figure 42. Two types of special soil samplers: a) Vicksburg sampler (Krynine and Judd, 1957) and b) Dennison sampler (Acker Drill
Company, Inc., 1985).
Core Barrels
When installing monitoring wells in consolidated forma-
tions the reliability and overall sample quality of the drilled
samples from either direct fluid rotary or air, water and foam
systems is very similar to that of the samples obtained in
unconsolidated formations. Where reliable samples are needed
to fully characterize the monitored zone, it is suggested that
cores be taken. Coring can be conducted by either wireline or
conventional methods. Both single and double-tube core bar-
rels are available as illustrated in Figures 48a and 48b.
In coring, the carbide or diamond-tipped bit is attached to
the lower end of the core barrel. As the bit cuts deeper, the
formation sample moves up the inside of the core tube. In the
single-wall tube, drilling fluid circulates downward around the
core that has been cut, flows between the core and the core
barrel and exits through the bit. The drilling fluid then circulates
up the annular space and is discharged at the land surface.
Because the drilling fluid is directly in contact with the core,
poorly-cemented or soft material is frequently eroded and the
core may be partially or totally destroyed. This problem exists
where formations are friable, erodable, soluble or highly frnc-
57
-------
Upper drive
head with left
threaded pin
Piston cable •
Hardened drive
shoe ,
N|
- Inner core barrel
(dedicated)
- Outer core barrel
Piston with rubber
washers & brass
spacers
Figure 43. internal sleeve wireline piston sampler (Zapico et al.,
1987).
tured. In these formations very little or no core may be recov-
ered.
In these circumstances a double-wall core barrel may be
necessary. In a double-wall core barrel, the drilling fluid is
circulated between the two walls of the core barrel and does not
directly contact the core that has been cut. As drilling fluid
circulates between the two walls of the core barrel, the core
moves up into the inner tube, where it is protected. As a result,
better cores of poorly-consolidated forrnationscan be recovered.
Good recovery can be obtained even in unconsolidated clays
and silts using a double-wall coring technique.
Selection of Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well
Installation
Matrix Purpose
The most appropriate drilling technology for use at a
specific site can only be determined by evaluating both the
hydrogeologic setting and the objectives of the monitoring
program. To assist the user in choosing an appropriate drilling
technology, a set of matrices has been developed that lists the
most commonly used drilling techniques for monitoring well
installation and delineates the principal criteria for evaluating
those drilling methods. A matrix has been developed for a
unique set of hydrogeologic conditions and well design require-
ments that limit the applicability of the drilling techniques.
Each applicable drilling method that can be used in the de-
scribed hydrogeologic setting and with the stated specific
design requirements has been evaluated on a scale of 1 to 10
with respect to the criteria listed in the matrix. A total number
for each drilling method was computed by adding the scores for
the various criteria. The totals represent a relative indication of
the desirability of the drilling methods for the specified condi-
tions.
Matrix Description and Development
A set of 40 matrices has been developed to depict the most
prevalent general hydrogeologic conditions and well design
requirements for monitoring wells. The complete set of matri-
ces are included as Appendix B. The matrices were developed
from a combination of five factors including:
1) unconsolidated or consolidated geologic
formations encountered during drilling,
2) saturated or unsaturated conditions encountered
during drilling,
3) whether or not invasion of the monitored zone by
drilling fluid is permitted,
4) depth range of the monitoring well 0 to 15 feet,
15 to 150 feet or greater than 150 feet and
5) casing diameter of the monitoring well: less than
2 inches, 2 to 4 inches or 4 to 8 inches.
Table 21 indicates the number of the matrix that corre-
sponds to the combination of factors used to develop the
numbers on each matrix.
Each matrix provides a relative evaluation of the applica-
bility of selected drilling methods commonly used to construct
monitoring wells. The drilling methods evaluated in the matrix
include:
1) hand auger,
2) driving,
3) jet percussion,
4) solid flight auger,
5) hollow stem auger,
6) mud rotary,
7) air rotary,
8) air rotary with casing driver,
9) dual-wall rotary and
10) cable tool.
A complete description of these drilling techniques and
their applicability to monitoring well installations can be found
in the beginning of this chapter under the heading entitled
"Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Installation.*'
The drilling techniques have been evaluated with respect to
a set of criteria that also influences the choice of a drilling
method. These additional criteria include:
1) versatility of the drilling method,
2) sample reliability,
58
-------
Table 21. Index to Matrices 1 through 40
Matrix Number
10
"TT"
12
13
14
15
17
19
20
TT
22
"25"
"23"
28
29
30
"5T
"52"
"55"
"54"
"55"
38
39
40
'o
a
8
I
I
c
f
f
c
'v>
5
&
Q
H
03
O
£
.3
Q
59
-------
Brass bushings
Teflon wiper disc
Swivel
Neoprene seals
Figure 44. Modified wireline piston sampler (Leach et al., 1988).
•Auger-head
Bit
(a) Basket
(c) Adapter ring
(b) Spring
(d) Flap valve
Figure 45. Clam-shell fitted auger head (Leach et al., 1988). Figure 46. Types of sample retainers (Mobile Drilling Company,
1982).
60
-------
Auger drill
rig
Auger column
Barrel sampler
Non-rotating
sampling rod
Auger head
Figure 47. Diagram of a continuous sampling tube system (after
Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987).
3) relative drilling cost,
4) availability of drilling equipment,
5) relative time required for well installation and
development,
6) ability of drilling technology to preserve natural
conditions,
7) ability to install design diameter of well and
8) relative ease of well completion and development.
A complete discussion of the importance of these factors
can be found in this section under the heading entitled "Criteria
For Evaluating Drilling Methods."
Each matrix has three main parts (Figure 49). The top
section of the page contains a brief description that delineates
which unique combination of general hydrogeologic condi-
tions and well design requirements apply to evaluations made
in that matrix. The middle of the page contains a chart that lists
the ten drilling methods on the vertical axis and the eight criteria
for evaluating the drilling methods on the horizontal axis. This
chart includes relative judgments, in the form of numbers, about
the applicability of each drilling method. The bottom of the
page contains explanatory notes that further qualify the general
hydrogeologic conditions and well design requirements that
have influence on the development of the numerical scheme in
the chart.
The numbers in the charts are generated by looking at each
of the criteria for evaluating drilling methods and evaluating
each drilling method on that one criteria with respect to the
conditions dictated by the prescribed five general hydrogeologic
conditions and well design requirements. The most applicable
drilling method is assigned a value of 10 and the other drilling
methods are then evaluated accordingly. The process always
includes assigning the number 10 to a drilling method. Once
each of the criteria is evaluated, the numbers for each drilling
method are summed and placed in the total column on the right.
Where a drilling method is not applicable, the symbol, "NA,"
for not applicable, is placed in the row for that drilling method.
How To Use the Matrices
The matrices are provided as an aid to the user when
selecting the appropriate drilling technique under selected
conditions. The user should begin by referring to Table 2 and
choosing the number of the matrix that most closely parallels
the hydrogeologic conditions at the site and that has the same
anticipated well depth and casing diameter requirements. The
user should then refer to that matrix in Appendix B, read the
explanatory notes and refer to the relative values in the "total"
column of the matrix. Explanatory text for both the drilling
methods and the criteria for evaluating drilling methods should
be reviewed to understand the assumptions and technical con-
siderations included in the relative numbers.
How To Interpret a Matrix Number
The numbers contained in the "total" column of the chart
represent a relative indication of the desirability of each drilling
method for the prescribed conditions of the matrix. Higher total
numbers indicate more appropriate drilling methods for the
specified assumptions. When numbers are relatively close in
value, drilling methods may be almost equally as favorable.
Where numbers range more widely in value, the matrix serves
as a relative guide for delineating a favorable drilling method.
The numbers cannot be compared between matrices; numerical
results are meaningful only when compared on the same chart.
The purpose of the numerical rating is to provide the user with
a relative measure of the applicability of drilling methods in
specific situations.
Once the user consults the matrix for a preliminary evalu-
ation, it is necessary to reevaluate the numbers in terms of the
factors that locally impact the ultimate choice of a drilling
method: equipment availability and relative drilling cost. A
drilling method might be indicated as the most favorable
technique according to the matrix totals, but the equipment may
not be available or the cost factor may be prohibitive. In these
situations, an alternative drilling method will need to be chosen
or the design criteria modified. The drilling costs have been
evaluated in the matrix based on relative national costs. Recog-
nizing that relative costs may vary, the user of the matrix should
look carefully at the relative cost column to determine if the
relative costs are applicable for the specific geographic location
of interest. Adjustments should be made if costs differ signifi-
cantly.
Criteria for Evaluating Drilling Methods
In determining the most appropriate drilling technology to
use at a specific site the following criteria must be considered.
61
-------
Core barrel
head outer
"--Tube
Ball
bearings
Hanger
bearing
tube head assembly
•Pin & nut
inner tube.*
Reaming
/shell
Core lifter
Core lifter
•Blank bit
• Outer tube
'"Reaming shell
•Blank bit
• Lifter case
(a)
(b)
Figure 48. Diagram of two type a of core barrels:
a) single tube and b) double-tube (Mobile Drilling Company, 1982).
62
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 1
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less; total
well depth O to 15 feet.
V Z W
'v C ^5
^k ^ m
\ > *
\ m O
\ §3
\ So
V ^
\ *~°
\ o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
3
£
3>
O)
_c
i
*»_
£_
2
£
$
1
1
2
3
10
8
NA
7
7
9
~
|
CO
'•s
0)
a
S.
CO
e/5
5
1
1
4
10
10
NA
5
8
10
«
2
O)
c
—
Q
1
S
0)
(T
9
10
8
7
9
8
NA
6
6
5
—
a
'5
UJ
01
=
E
"o
£•
3
'5
5
10
10
10
9
9
10
NA
4
1
7
Q}
5 E
T3 Q
w U
II
fc
CO
1- 0
.11
S ~
dj jo
QC £
5
5
5
10
10
7
NA
6
6
4
0
Is
•§.2
c ~
y c
1- O
IE
:= 5
QZ
I?
— 41
1 S
.O w
< Q.
9
5
1
4
8
4
NA
9
9
10
&
a
Q
c
*0>
1
5
"5J
_c
| =
= 5
< 'o
6
1
1
5
10
10
NA
10
10
10
I
I
E
O
=
I-
9i ^
UJ —
II
— T3
= 5
4
4
1
2
9
5
NA
10
9
10
TOTAL
49
37
29
44
75
62
NA
57
56
65
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. The shallow depth of up to 15 feet, and small completed well diameter of 2 inches or less allows maximum flexibility in equipment.
6. Samples collected in solid flight auger, hollow-stem auger, mud rotary and cable-tool holes are taken by standard split-spoon
(ASTM D1586) or thin-wall sampling (ASTM D1587) techniques, at 5-foot intervals.
Figure 49. Format for a matrix on drilling method selection.
These criteria must encompass both hydrogeologic settings and
the objectives of the monitoring/drilling program.
Versatility of the Drilling Equipment and
Technology with Respect to the Hydrogeologic
Conditions at the Site
The drilling equipment must effectively deal with the full
range of conditions at each site and also allow the satisfactory
installation of well components as designed. The choice of
proper drilling techniques requires specific knowledge of: 1)
the objectives of the monitoring well, including desired well
depth and casing diameter, 2) the type(s) of geologic formations
to be penetrated and 3) the potential borehole instability and/or
completion difficulties. Additional factors that influence the
choice of a drilling method include: 1) saturation or unsaturation
of the zone(s) to be drilled, 2) necessity to install a falter pack in
the monitoring well and 3) potential adverse effects on the final
63
-------
monitoring program by drilling fluid invasion into the moni-
tored zone.
The interaction between the geologic formations, hydro-
logic conditions and the equipment to be used is best illustrated
by example. After reviewing the discussion of drilling methods
in the beginning of this section, it should be obvious that
hollow-stem augers can be used effectively in unconsolidated
materials, but are not applicable to the installation of monitor-
ing wells in solid rock such as granite. It may be less obvious
that drilling through the saturated, unstable overburden overly-
ing solid rock, such as granite, maybe very difficult with the air
rotary technique; however, the air rotary technique would be
very effective in drilling the granite. The overburden, con-
versely, can be very effectively dealt with by hollow-stem
augers.
If the monitoring objectives in this illustration include
pumping at relatively high rates, then a 4-inch or larger casing
may be required. The installation of the casing mandates the use
of a large inside diameter hollow-stem auger unless the
overburden is sufficiently stable to permit open-hole casing
installation. If either the casing diameter is too large or the depth
is too great, then hollow-stem augers are not appropriate and an
alternative drilling technique (e.g. mud rotary, cable tool, drill
through casing hammer, etc.) must be evaluated. Thus, judg-
ment has to be made for each site whether or not the preferred
drilling technology can deal with the extant hydrogeologic
conditions and the objectives of the monitoring program.
Reliability of Formation (Soil/Rock/Water)
Samples Collected During Drilling
The purpose of a monitoring well is to provide access to a
specific zone for which water level (pressure head) measure-
ments are made, and from which water samples can be obtained.
These water samples must accurately represent the quality of
the water in the ground in the monitored zone. To this end, it is
essential to acquire accurate, representative information about
the formations penetrated during drilling and specifically about
the intended monitored zone. Sample reliability depends par-
tially on the type of samples that can be taken when using
various drilling techniques. The type of samples attainable and
the relative reliability of the samples are summarized in Table
19 and discussed below in terms of drilling methods. An
additional discussion of sampling techniques is found in the
section entitled "Soil Sampling and Rock Coring Methods."
Hand Auger —
Soil samples that are taken by hand auger are disturbed by
the augering process and are usually collected directly from the
cutting edge of the auger. Deeper samples may be non-repre-
sentative if sloughing of shallow materials occurs. Drilling by
hand auger is usually terminated when the saturated zone is
encountered. It is possible to continue drilling below the satu-
rated zone in some situations by adding water and/or drilling
mud. However, when water and/or drilling mud are added,
reliable samples cannot usually be obtained. An additional
discussion of hand augering can be found in the section entitled
'Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Installation."
Driven Wells —
No samples can be taken during the construction of a driven
well, although some interpretation of stratigraphic variation
can be made from the driving record. Water-quality samples
can be obtained in any horizon by pumping from that depth of
penetration. An additional discussion of driven wells can be
found in the section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring
Well Installation."
Jet Percussion —
Neither valid soil samples nor valid water samples can be
obtained during the construction of wells by this method. Only
gross lithology can be observed in the material that is washed
to the surface during the jetting procedure. An additional
discussion of jet percussion drilling can be found in the section
entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Installation."
Solid Flight Augers —
Soil samples collected from solid, continuous flight augers
are rotated up the auger flights to the surface during drilling or
scraped from the auger flights upon extraction. The disturbed
samples from either of these sources provide samples of moderate
quality down to the first occurrence of water, and generally
unreliable samples below that level.
More valid samples can be obtained where the borehole is
stable enough to remain open. In this situation, the auger flights
can be removed from the borehole and samples can then be
taken by either split-spoon (ASTM D1586) orthm-wall (ASTM
D1587) sampling techniques. It is generally not possible to use
these techniques in saturated formations with the augers re-
moved because the borehole frequently collapses or the bottom
of the borehole "heaves" sand or silt upward into the open
borehole. The heaving occurs as a consequence of differential
hydrostatic pressure and is exacerbated by the removal of the
augers. When caving or heaving occurs, it is very difficult to
obtain reliable samples. An additional discussion on solid-
flight augers can be found in the section entitled "Drilling
Methods for Monitoring Well Installation."
Hollow-Stem Augers —
Where samples are collected from depths of less than 150
feet, the hollow-stem auger technique is the method most
frequently used to obtain samples from unconsolidated forma-
tions. Samples may be taken through the hollow-stem center of
the augers by split-spoon (ASTM D1586), thin-wall (ASTM
D1587) or wireline piston sampling methods (refer to Figures 40
through 44). The maximum outside diameter of the sampler is
limited by the inside diameter of the hollow stem. If 3.25-inch
inside diameter augers are being used, then a maximum 3-inch
outside diameter sampler can be used and must still retain the
requisite structural strength and meet the requirement to opti-
mize (minimize) the area ratio. An additional discussion on soil
sampling can be found in the section entitled "Soil Sampling
and Rock Coring Methods."
The rotation of the augers causes the cuttings to move
upward and debris to be ground and "smeared" along the
borehole in the thin annular zone between the borehole wall and
the auger flights. This smearing has both positive and negative
connotations. Because the movement of debris is upward, the
cuttings from the deeper zones may seal off shallower zones.
This minimizes cross-connection of fluids from shallow to deep
zones, but increases the possibility of deep to shallow contami-
nation. Shallow zones that may have been penetrated in the
upper portion of the borehole are also difficult to develop once
64
-------
smearing occurs. With the shallow zones sealed off by cutting
debris and with the auger flights serving as temporary casing,
it is often possible to obtain valid formation samples of discrete
saturated zones as they are initially penetrated.
Water samples are difficult to obtain in the saturated zone
during drilling due to formation instability. A special type of
lead auger flight has been designed to overcome the problem of
collecting water samples concurrent with drilling and to make
it possible to sample and/or pump test individual zones as the
augers are advanced. This specially reinforced screened auger
serves as the lead, or lowermost auger and is placed just above
the cutting head (Figure 28). This screened section can be used
to temporarily stabilize the borehole while a small diameter
pump or other sampling device is installed within the hollow
stem. Appropriate testing can then be performed. The advan-
tage of this technique is low-cost immediate data and water
sample acquisition during drilling. The major disadvantages
are: 1) doubt about cross-connection of zones and ultimate data
validity and 2) the risk of losing both the equipment and the
borehole if extremely difficult drilling conditions are encoun-
tered since there is some structural weakness in the screened
section. An additional discussion of hollow-stem augers can be
found in the section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring
Well Installation."
Direct Mud Rotary Drilling —
A variety of sampling technologies can be used in concert
with mud rotary drilling techniques. These include: 1) grab or
ditch samples from circulated cuttings, 2) split-spoon and thin-
walled samples in unconsolidated materials and 3) single and
double-tube conventional core barrels in consolidated mater-
ials. Indirect rotary drilling, the functions of the drilling fluid are
to: 1) lubricate and cool the bit, 2) remove fragmentary particles
as they are loosened and 3) stabilize the borehole. The cuttings
are typically circulated up the borehole, through a pipe or ditch,
into a temporary settling tank or pit. The drilling fluid is then
circulated back down the drill pipe (Figure 29).
Samples taken from the ditch or settling pond (mud pit) are
therefore a composite of: 1) materials cut a few minutes earlier
(time lag varies with depth, borehole size, drill pipe and pump
rate), 2) any unstable materials that have washed or fallen into
the borehole from a shallower zone and 3) any re-circulated
materials that failed to settle out during earlier circulation.
These materials are mixed with the drilling fluid and any
additives used during the drilling process. The interpretation of
these samples requires experience and even then the interpre-
tation is questionable. Ditch samples are frequently collected in
the petroleum industry, but have little practical value in the
effective installation of monitoring wells. Thin, stratified zones
that require specific monitoring are difficult to identify from
ditch samples.
Both split-spoon (ASTM D1586) and thin-wall samples
(ASTM D1587) can be obtained while using direct rotary
drilling methods in unconsolidated materials. At shallow depths,
samples are taken through the drill bit in exactly the same
manner as previous] y described for hollow-stem augers. Corre-
sponding size limitations and sampling problems prevail.
As depths increase below about 150 feet, the time con-
sumed in taking split-spoon and thin-wall samples becomes
excessive and wireline sampling devices are used to collect and
retrieve samples. Samples can be taken either continuously or
intermittently. In unconsolidated materials, wireline samplers
can collect only disturbed samples and even then there arc
recovery problems and limitations for both fine and coarse-
-grained materials. In consolidate rock the best samples can be
obtained by coring.
A significant advantage of drilling with a good drilling
mud program is that typically the open borehole can be stabi-
lized by the drilling mud for a sufficient period of time to
remove the drilling tools and run a complete suite of geophysi-
cal logs in the open hole. This information is used in concert
with other data (i.e., the drilling time log, the sample log, fluid
loss or gain information and drilling characteristics) to provide
definitive evaluation of formation boundaries and to select
screen installation intervals.
When attempting to define the in-situ properties of uncon-
solidated materials, drilling by the mud rotary method offers
another advantage. Because the drilling mud maintains the
stability of the borehole, samples taken by split-spoon or thin-
wall methods ahead of the drill bit tend to be much more
representative of indigenous formation conditions than those
samples taken, for example, during hollow-stem auger drilling.
In auger drilling it is sometimes very difficult to obtain a
sample from below the cutting head that has not been affected
by the formation heaving upward into the open borehole.
If the drilling fluid is clear water with no drilling additives,
then it maybe difficult to maintain borehole stability because
little mudcake accumulates on the wall of the borehole. In this
case, the loss or gain of water while drilling is an indication of
the location of permeable zones.
Because drilling fluid is used to drill the borehole and
because this fluid infiltrates into the penetrated formations,
limited water-quality information can be obtained while drill-
ing. Drilling mud seals both high and low-pressure zones if
properly used. However, this sealing action minimizes
interaquifer cross-contamination while drilling. Before any
zone provides representative samples, all drilling mud and fil-
trate should be removed from the formation(s) of interest by
well development.
The most common additives to drilling mud are barite
(barium sulfate) for weight control and sodium montmorillo-
nite (bentonite) for viscosity and water loss control. Both can
alter indigenous water quality.
Bentonite is extremely surface active and forms clay/
organic complexes with a wide range of organic materials. The
water used to mix the drilling mud is potentially interactive both
with the drilling mud and with the water in the formation. At the
very least, the drilling fluid dilutes the formation water that is
present prior to the drilling activity. For these reasons it is very
difficult, if not impossible, to be confident that sufficient
development has been performed on a direct rotary-drilled
monitoring well, and that the water quality in a particular
sample is truly representative of the water quality in place prior
to the construction of the well.
Where very low concentrations of a variety of contami-
nants are being evaluated and where the potential reactions are
65
-------
undefined, it is not recommended that drilling fluid be used
during monitoring well installation. This same concept applies
to boreholes drilled by cable tool and/or augering techniques
where drilling fluid is necessary for borehole stability. Where
drilling mud is used, monitoring well development is continued
until such time as a series of samples provides statistical
evidence that no further changes are occurring in key param-
eters. When this occurs, the resultant quality is considered to be
representative (Barcelona, et al, 1985a). An additional discus-
sion of drilling fluids can be found in the section entitled
"Drilling Fluids."
Water-level measurements of different zones penetrated
cannot be determined while drilling with direct rotary methods.
Accurate water levels can only be determined by installing,
screening and developing monitoring wells in the specific
zones of interest. An additional discussion on direct mud rotary
drilling can be found in the section entitled "Drilling Methods
for Monitoring Well Installation."
Air Rotary —
Direct air rotary is restricted in application to consolidated
rock. Where the bedrock is overlain by unconsolidated materi-
als, a borehole can be drilled and sampled by alternative
methods including: 1) roller-cone bit with water-based fluid, 2)
air with a casing driver, 3) cable tool or 4) augering. Formation
samples are taken by the appropriate methods discussed in the
related sections of this discussion. Once surface casing is
installed and sealed into bedrock, the underlying bedrock can be
successfully drilled using air rotary methods.
When using air rotary drilling in semi-consolidated and
consolidated materials, air is circulated down the drill pipe and
through the bit. The air picks up the cuttings and moves the
cuttings up through the annular space between the drill pipe and
the wall of the borehole. If the formations drilled are dry, the
samples reach the surface in the form of dust. By injecting water
or a mixture of water and surfactant (foam): 1) dust is con-
trolled, 2) regrinding of samples is minimized and 3) the sizes
of individual particles are increased sufficiently to provide
good formation samples. Because the injected water/foam is
constantly in motion and supported by the air, there is only a
slight possibility of water loss or formation contamination
during drilling.
After water is encountered in the borehole, further injec-
tion of water from the surface can often be eliminated or
minimized and good rock fragments can be obtained that are
representative of the formations penetrated. Samples obtained
in this manner are not affected by the problems of recirculation,
lag time and drilling fluid contamination that plague sample
evaluation when drilling mud is used. Air may cause changes in
the chemical and biological activity in the area adjacent to the
borehole. Examples of quality changes include oxidation and/
or stripping of volatile organic chemicals. The time required for
these changes to be reversed varies with the hydrogeologic and
geochemical conditions. Because the rock boreholes are gen-
erally stable and penetration rates are high, there is minimal
contamination from previously-drilled upper zones. Water-
quality samples and water levels can be easily obtained from the
first saturated zone penetrated, but this zone must be cased if
subsequent zones are to be individually evaluated.
For monitoring well installation, the injected air must be
filtered prior to injection to prevent contamination of the
borehole by oil exhausted by the air compressor. Because a
down-the-hole hammer requires lubricating oil for operation, it
has more limitations for monitoring well installation. An addi-
tional discussion on air rotary drilling can be found in the
section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Instal-
lation."
Air Rotary with Casing Driver —
Unconsolidated formations can be drilled and sampled by
combining air rotary drilling with a casing driver method. In
this procedure the drill bit is usually extended approximately
one foot below the bottom of the open casing, and the casing is
maintained in this position as the drill bit is advanced (Figure
33). The casing is either large enough to permit retraction of the
bit, in which instance the casing must be driven through the
undergauge hole cut by the bit; or an underreamer is used, and
the casing moves relatively easily down into the oversized
borehole. Generally, the undergauge procedure is favored for
sampling unconsolidated formations, and the underreamer is
favored for semi-consolidated formations. Either technique
allows good samples to be obtained from the freshly-cut for-
mation and circulated up the cased borehole. If chemical quality
of the formation sample is important, particularly with regard to
volatile organics or materials that can be rapidly oxidized, then
air drilling may not be appropriate. When the casing is advanced
coincident with the deepening of the borehole, the sample
collection procedures and the sample quality are very similar to
those prevailing with the use of direct air rotary. An additional
discussion on air rotary with casing driver can be found in the
section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Instal-
lation."
Dual-Wall Reverse Circulation Rotary —
In dual-wall reverse circulation rotary drilling, either
water or air can be used as the circulation medium. The outer
wall of the dual-wall system serves to case the borehole. Water
(or air) is circulated down between the two casing walls, picks
up the cuttings at the bottom of the borehole, transports the
cuttings up the center of the inner casing and deposits them at
the surface. Because the borehole is cased, the samples col-
lected at the surface are very reliable and representative of the
formations penetrated. Sample collection using dual-wall ro-
tary has the following advantages: 1) third stratigraphic zones
often can be identified; 2) contamination of the borehole by
drilling fluid is minimized; 3) interaquifer cross-contamination
is minimized; 4) individual zones that are hydraulically distinct
can be identified with specific water levels, and discrete
samples often can be collected if sufficient time is allowed for
recovery; 5) in low hydraulic pressure formations, air pressure
within the borehole may prevent the formation water from
entering the borehole and 6) sampling at the surface can be
continuous. Split-spoon samples can also be collected through
the bit. One disadvantage is that because the outer casing is
removable and not sealed by grout, hydraulic leakage can occur
along the outside of the unsealed casing.
Water or foam can be injected to increase the penetration
rate and improve sample quality. An additional discussion of
dual-wall reverse circulation rotary drilling can be found in the
66
-------
section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring Well Instal-
lation."
Cable Tool —
When drilling in saturated, unconsolidated sand and gravel,
good quality disturbed samples can be obtained by the cable
tool "drive and bail" technique. In this technique, casing is
driven approximately 2 to 5 feet into the formation being
sampled, The sample is then removed from the casing by a
bailer. For best sample quality, a flat-bottom bailer is used to
clean the borehole (Figure 36). The entire sample is then
collected at the surface, quartered or otherwise appropriately
split and made available for gradation analyses. When drilling
in unsaturated material, water must be added to the borehole
during drilling and sampling.
The drive and bail technique is often the best method for
sampling well-graded or extremely coarse-grained deposits
because both coarse and fine-grained fractions are collected
during sampling. Large-diameter casing can be driven and large
bailers can be used. The most common size range for casing is
from 6 inches to 16 inches although larger sizes are available.
For the drive and bail technique to be effective, excessive
heaving of the formation upward into the casing during cleanout
must be prevented. This can usually be controlled by: 1)
overdriving the casing, thereby maintaining a "plug" of the next
sample in the casing at all times, 2) careful operation of the
bailer and 3) adding water to the borehole to maintain positive
hydraulic head within the borehole.
During drive and bail-type drilling, split-spoon (ASTM
D1586) and thin-wall (ASTM D1587) samples can be collected
after cleaning out the casing with the bailer. Samples are
collected ahead of the casing by inserting conventional sam-
pling tools inside the casing. This technique permits sampling
of fine-grained, unconsolidated formations.
The quality of cable tool samples from consolidated forma-
tions varies with drilling conditions. When the bedrock is
saturated, good broken chips of the formation can be obtained
by bailing at frequent intervals. If the chips remain in the
borehole too long or if sufficient lubrication is lacking, the
samples are re-ground to powder.
When drilling by cable tool techniques and using a good
casing program, it is usually possible to identify and isolate
individual water-bearing units as they are drilled. This provides
the opportunity to obtain good water-level and waterquality
data. An additional discussion on cable tool drilling can be
found in the section entitled "Drilling Methods for Monitoring
Well Installation."
Relative Drilling Costs
Drilling and completion costs vary for individual methods
with each set of general conditions and well design require-
ments. For example, the cost of drilling and sampling with the
hollow-stem auger method may be much higher for a dense,
bouldery till than it is for a similar depth in saturated, medium-
soft lake clays. The cost of installing nominal 2-inch diameter
casing and screen within hollow-stem augers varies with depth
and borehole stability.
The relative drilling cost ratings shown on each matrix
apply to the broad range of conditions included within each set
of general conditions and well casing requirements. The rela-
tive ratings reflect the total cost of drilling, sampling, casing,
screening, filter-packing, grouting, developing and surface
protecting the monitoring well. Equivalent costs of mobiliza-
tion and access are assumed. Relative ratings are based on
consideration of the average costs when compared to the other
methods of drilling throughout the continental United States.
Local cost variations can be significantly influenced by equip-
ment availability and can cause variation in these relative
ratings. Where local costs vary from the ratings shown, an
adjustment should be made to the specific matrix so that the
actual costs are more accurately reflected.
Availability of Equipment
The ratings shown in the matrices for equipment availabil-
ity are based on the general availability of the drilling equip-
ment throughout the United States. The availability of specific
equipment on a local basis may necessitate the revision of the
rating in the matrix to make the rating more representative.
The type of equipment most generally available for
monitoring well installation is the direct mud rotary drilling rig.
Direct mud rotary techniques are applicable to water supply
wells, gas and oil exploration and development and soil testing.
As a result, this equipment is widely available throughout the
country.
Solid-flight and hollow-stem augering equipment is also
generally available throughout all regions where unconsoli-
dated materials predominate. The portability of augering equip-
ment and the prevalent use of augers in shallow foundation
investigations have increased auger availability to almost all
areas.
Air rotary drilling has primary application in consolidated
rock. Availability of equipment is greatest in those consolidated
rock areas where there are mining exploration, water-supply
production activities or quarrying applications. The availability
of this equipment is greatest in: 1) the western mountainous
sea, 2) the northeast and 3) the nothwest parts of the country.
Casing drivers used in combination with direct air rotary
drilling are somewhat sparsely, but uniformly distributed
throughout all regions. Versatility in screen installation, casing
pulling and application in unconsolidated materials have broad-
ened the use of air rotary with casing driver techniques.
Dual-wall rotary drilling is becoming increasingly popular
because the technique can be used in a wide range of both
consolidated and unconsolidated formations. Availability is
generally restricted to the west-central and southwestern parts
of the country.
Cable tool equipment availability is limited in many por-
tions of the south, southeast, southwest, and northwest. It
is generally available in the north-central and northeastern
portions of the country.
Relative Time Required for Well Installation and
Development
The time required for drilling the well, installing the casing
and screen and developing the well can be a significant factor
when choosing a drillng method. For example, if a relatively
deep hole drilled with cable tool techniques takes several days,
67
-------
weeks or longer, there maybe significant scheduling disadvan-
tages. If longer-tarn supervision is required, then this addi-
tional cost factor must also be taken into account. The excess
cost of supervison is not included in the matrix evaluation.
Similarly, if a direct mud rotary technique is employed to make
a fast installation and an additional three weeks of development
is required before a valid sample can be obtained, the advantages
of the rapid installation need to be re-evaluated.
Ability of Drilling Technology to Preserve Natural
Conditions
Assuming that the purpose of a monitoring well is to
provide access to a specific zone for which water-level (pres-
sure head) measurements are to be made, and from which water
samples can be obtained to accurately represent the quality of
the water in place in the zone being monitored, then it is
obviously important that the drilling methodology employed
must minimize the disturbance of indigenous conditions or
offer a good possibility that indigenous conditions can be
restored. To achieve these goals, the drilling methodology
should result in minimal opportunity for physical and/or chemi-
cal interactions that might cause substantial or unpredictable
changes in the quality of the water being sampled. The follow-
ing discussions present some of the problems and potential
problems related to the disturbance of the natural conditions as
a consequence of monitoring well drilling and installation:
1) When using drilling mud in the borehole, filtrate
from the drilling fluid invades the adjacent
formations. This filtrate mixes with the natural
formation fluids and provides the opportunity for
chemical reaction between the mud filtrate and
the formation fluid. If chemical reactions occur,
"false" water-quality readings may result. The
mixing effect is minimized by good development;
potential chemical reactions are more difficult to
deal with in a reasonably predictable manner. For
example, if a high pH filtrate invades a low pH
formation and metals are present in either fluid,
precipitation of the metals can be anticipated in
the vicinity of the borehole. The metals may
subsequently be re-dissolved at an unknown rate,
if chemical conditions are not constant. Thus, the
drilling fluid filtrate invasion can result in
alternately low and high readings of metals at
different intervals of time.
2) When a monitoring well is drilled with augers,
fine silts and clays commonly smear along the
borehole wall and frequently seal the annular
space between the augers and the borehole wall.
This sealing action can then minimize the cross-
connection of discrete zones. However, the fine-
grained particulate matter that is smeared into the
zone of interest also reduces the flow from that
zone, introduces the possibility of cross-
contamination from another zone and presents
the opportunity for the clays that are smeared into
the zone to sorb contaminants and consequently
generate non-representative water-quality results.
In mud rotary drilling, a mudcake is deposited on
the borehole wall. This bentonitic mudcake serves
to stabilize the borehole and also has the capacity
to sorb both organic and inorganic constituents.
3) During any drilling process physical disruption of
the formation occurs and grain-to-grain
relationships change. Regardless of whether or
not the well is completed with a natural or artificial
filter pack, the flow paths to the well are altered;
tortuosity is changed; Reynolds numbers are
modified with flow path and velocity variations;
and equilibrium (if, in fact, the indigenous water
is at equilibrium) is shifted. If the formation is
permitted to collapse, as may occur in sand and
gravel materials, the removal of the collapsed
material exacerbates the problem.
With the changes that occur in the physical setting,
it is very difficult to be confident that the water
samples subsequently collected from the
monitoring well truly reflect conditions in the
ground beyond the influence of the disturbed
zone around the well. The changes are of particular
concern when analyzing for very low
concentrations of contamination.
It becomes apparent that a drilling technique that has the
least possible disruptive influence on the zone(s) being moni-
tored is preferable in any given setting. The matrices presented
indicate the relative impact of the various drilling methodolo-
gies for the designated circumstances.
Ability of the Specified Drilling Technology to
Permit the Installation of the Proposed Casing
Diameter at the Design Depth
The design diameter for the casing and well intakes(s) to be
used in any monitoring well depends on the proposed use of the
monitoring well (i.e. water-level measurement, high-volume
sampling, low-volume sampling, etc.). When installing artifi-
cial filter packs and bentonite seals, a minimum annular space
4 inches greater in diameter than the maximum outside diam-
eter of the casing and screen is generally needed. A 2-inch
outside diameter monitoring well would then require a mini-
mum 6-inch: 1) outside diameter borehole, 2) auger inside
diameter or 3) casing inside diameter for reliable well installa-
tion. This need for a 4-inch annular space places a severe
limitation on the use of several current] y-employed drilling
technologies.
For example, hollow-stem augers have been widely used to
install 2 3/8-inch outside diameter monitoring wells. A signifi-
cant portion of this work has been performed within 3 1/4-inch
inside diameter hollow-stem augers. At shallow depths, espe-
cially less than fifteen feet, it has been possible to install well
intake and casing, filter pack, bentonite seal and surface grout
within the small working space. However, at greater depths, it
is very doubtful if many of these components are truly emplaced
as specified. There simply is not sufficient annular clearance to
work effective] y. For a more complete discussion on filter pack
and screen emplacement in hollow-stem augers, refer to Ap-
pendix A.
When drilling with direct air rotary with a casing hammer,
the maximum commonly-used casing size is 8 inches in diameter.
The outside diameter of the monitoring well casing should
-------
therefore be 4 inches or less to maintain adequate working
space. Because pipe sizes are classified by nominal diameters,
the actual working space will be somewhat less than the stated
annular diameter unless the actual pipe O.D. is used in calcula-
tions.
When drilling through unstable formations with dual-wall
reverse circulation methods, the monitoring well casing must
be installed through the bit. The hole in the bit barely permits the
insertion of a nominal 2-inch diameter casing. This method
does not allow the installation of an artificial filter pack because
there is no clearance between the bit and 2-inch casing.
The ratings presented in each matrix evaluate the relative
ability of the various methodologies to permit the installation of
the design casing diameters in the indicated hydrogeologic
conditions.
Ease of Well Completion and Development
Well completion and development difficulty varies with:
1) well depth, 2) borehole diameter, 3) casing and well intake
diameter, 4) well intake length, 5) casing and well intake
materials, 6) drilling technique, 7) mud program, 8) hydrostatic
pressure of the aquifer, 9) aquifer transmissivity, 10) other
hydrogeologic conditions and 11) geologic conditions that
affect the borehole. The relative ease of dealing with these
variables by the selected drilling equipment is shown in each
matrix for the indicated conditions. For example, where a
relatively thin, low-yield aquifer has been drilled with hollow-
stem augers, the muddy clay/silt mixture from the borehole
tends to seal the zone where the well intake is to be set. The
development of this zone is very difficult. If a filter pack has
been installed, development becomes almost impossible. If
direct mud rotary is used to drill this same low transmissivity
zone, and the mudcake from the drilling fluid remains between
the filter pack and the borehole wall, very difficult development
can be expected. If the borehole is drilled with clear water,
development might be easier.
For any given scenario a very subtle modification of
procedure may make the difference between success and fail-
ure. The ratings shown in the matrices are based on general
considerations. Their relative values expressed in the table vary
in specific circumstances. Most importantly, however, is that
an experienced observer be able to make on-site observations
and to modify the procedures as the work progresses.
Drilling Specifications and Contracts
The cost of installing a monitoring well depends on several
factors including 1) site accessibility, 2) labor and material
costs, 3) well design, 4) well use, 5) well development, 6) well
yield and 7) local geologic conditions (Everett 1980). Because
these factors are variable, it is important to secure a well
contract that addresses these items in a concise and clear format.
Proper formatting helps ensure that the well will reconstructed
as specified in the contract and for the agreed price. In simple
terms, a well-written contract is a quality control check on well
construction.
Monitoring well contracts are typically written in three
major sections including: 1) general conditions, 2) special
conditions and 3) technical specifications. General conditions
address items dated to the overall project performance includ-
ing: scheduling, materials, equipment, labor, permits, rights of
various parties, tests and inspections, safety, payments, con-
tracts, bonds and insurance (Driscoll, 1986). Special conditions
detail project-specific and site-specific items including: 1) a
general description of the purpose and scope of the work, 2)
work schedule, 3) insurance and bond requirements, 4) perti-
nent subsurface information, 5) description of necessary per-
mits, 6) information on legal easements, 7) property boundaries
and utility location and 8) a description of tests to be performed
and materials to be used during the project (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1975). If general and spe-
cial conditions appear to conflict, special conditions of the
contract prevail (Driscoll, 1986). Technical specifications con-
tain detailed descriptions of dimensions, materials, drilling
methods and completion methods.
Most contracts are awarded as part of a bidding process.
The bidding process may be either competitive or non-competi-
tive. In a competitive bidding process, contractors are asked to
submit cost estimates based on a set of specifications for drilling
the monitoring wells. The specifications are developed prior to
the request for cost proposal by either the client or a consultant
to the client. Suggested areas that should specifically be ad-
dressed in the specifications are listed in Table 22.
Table 22. Suggested Areas to be Addressed in Monitoring Well Bidding Specifications
Scope of Work
Site Hydrogeology
• existing reports
• well logs
• depth of wells
Schedule of Work Dates
Well Drilling Installation
• materials
• drilling method(s)
• annular seal installation
• development
• protective equipment
• disposal of cuttings
Record-Keeping and Requirements
Sampling Requirements and Procedures
Site Access
•road construction
•tree clearing
•drainage
•leveling
Decontamination of Equipment
• procedures
• materials
• disposal of cuttings and liquids
Site Safety
• equipment
• training
Conditions
• permits
• certificates
• utility location
• site clean up
• procedures for drilling difficulties
• non-functioning wells
• government forms required
• client's right to vary quantities or delete items
Payment Procedures
69
-------
After cost estimates are obtained, a contractor is selected
based on qualifications and pricing. Although some contracts
are awarded by choosing the lowest bidder, this practice is not
suggested unless the qualifications of the contractor indicate
that a quality job can be performed. It is good policy to meet
with the selected bidder prior to signing the contract and clarify
every technical point and related unit cost. This understanding,
duly noted by minutes of the meeting, can eliminate costly
errors and misunderstandings. An inspection of the contractor's
equipment that will be used on the job should also be made.
Qualifications of contractors are often evaluated during a
prequalification process. A contractor prequalifies by submit-
ting information about previous job experience that is related to
the scope of work. The prequalification process allows the
client to accept bids only from contractors that demonstrate
specific qualifications to perform the job. This process helps to
ensure that the monitoring wells will be installed by competent
contractors. When subcontractors for drilling or supplies are to
be employed, the list of subcontractors should also be approved
prior to the contract award.
Another way to avoid misunderstandings during the bid-
ding process is to hold a bidders meeting. In a bidders meeting,
the potential contractors meet in a group forum with the client
to discuss the overall scope of the proposed work and to discuss
specifications for monitoring well installation. Any questions
about the specifications or problems with performance accord-
ing to the specifications can be discussed and resolved prior to
proposal submission. All information must be provided
equally to all prospective bidders.
In non-competitive bidding, cost estimates are provided by
only one contractor. Because the procedure may be less formal,
the contractor may play a more active role in developing the
monitoring well specifications and presenting a cost estimate.
However, a less formal process may also mean that written
specifications for monitoring well installation may never be
developed. This situation should be avoided to help ensure that
the monitoring wells are constructed properly.
Cost proposals can be submitted in a variety of formats
including 1) fixed price, 2) unit price and 3) cost plus. Fixed-
price contracts list the manpower, materials and additional
costs needed to perform the work and specify a fixed price that
will be paid upon completion of the work. Unit price contracts
are similar, but establish a freed price for each unit of work that
is performed. Cost-plus contracts list speific costs associated
with performing the work and include a percentage of those
costs as an additional amount that will be paid to perform job.
A percentage listed in a cost-plus contract is typically viewed as
the profit percentage being proposed by the contractor. In fixed-
price and unit-price proposals, the profit percentage is included
as part of the itemized pricing structure.
To ensure that the monitoring well is constructed accord-
ing to the intent of the specifications, the contract should be very
specific and list all necessary items and procedures so that
nothing is left to interpretation or imagination. This clarity can
best be obtained by listing individual pay items instead of
combining items into unspecified quantities in lump sum pric-
ing. Suggested items that should specifically be addressed in the
contract on a unit price basis are listed in Table 23.
The bidder should also be required to supply information
on: 1) estimated time required for job completion, 2) date
available to start work, 3) type and method of drilling equip-
ment to be used and 4) insurance coverage. A pay item system
may also reduce the need for change during the drilling process
by further clarifying the procedures to be used (Wayne Westberg,
M-W Drilling, Inc., personal communication, 1986). A change
order is a written agreement from the purchaser to the contractor
authorizing additions, deletions or revisions in the scope of
work, or an adjustment in the contract price or effective period
of the contract (United States Environmental Protection Agency,
1975). The contract should specify what payment provisions
'Table 23. Suggested Items for Unit Cost In Contractor Pricing Schedule
Item
Pricing Basis
•Mobilization
•Site preparation
•Drilling to specified depth
•Sampling
•Material supply
surface casing
well casing
end caps
screen
filter material
bentonite seal(s) '
grout
casing protector
•Support equipment
water truck and water
bulldozer
•Decontamination
•Standby
•Field expenses
•Material installation
•Well development
•Demobilization
•Drilling cost adjustment for variations in depths
lump sum
lump sum
per lineal foot or per hour
each
per lineal foot
per lineal foot
each
per lineal foot
per lineal foot or per bag
per lineal foot
per lineal foot or per beg
each
lump sum
per hour
lump sum
per hour
per man day or lump sum
per hour or lump sum
per hour or lump sum
lump sum
± per foot
70
-------
will be made if the monitoring well cannot be completed as
specified. The contract should also define who bears the costs
and what the basis for payment will be when drilling difficulties
are encountered that were not anticipated in the pricing sched-
ule.
After the contract is signed and work is scheduled to begin,
a predrilling meeting between the supervising geologist and the
driller should be held to discuss operational details. This meet-
ing reduces the opportunity for misunderstanding of the speci-
fications and improves project relationships.
References
Aardvark Corporation, 1977. Product literature; Puyallup,
Washington, 2 pp.
Acker Drill Company, Inc., 1985. Soil sampling tools catalog;
Scranton, Pennsylvania, 17 pp.
Acker, W.L., 1974. Basic procedures for soil sampling and core
drilling; Acker Drill Company, Inc., Scranton,
Pennsylvania, 246 pp.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1983. Standard
practice for thin-wall tube sampling of soils: D1587; 1986
Annual Book of American Society for Testing and Materials
Standards, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 305-307.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1984. Standard
method for penetration test and split barrel sampling of
soils: D1586; 1986 Annual Book of American Society for
Testing and Materials Standards, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, pp. 298-303.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich and E.E. Garske,
1985a. Practical guide for ground-water sampling Illinois
State Water Survey, SWS Contract Report 374, Champaign,
Illinois, 93 pp.
Buckeye Drill Company/Bucyrus Erie Company, 1982.
Buckeye drill operators manual; Zanesville, Ohio, 9 pp.
Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987, Catalog of product
literature St. Louis, Missouri, 12 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Everett, Lome G., 1980, Ground-water monitoring; General
Electric Company technology marketing operation,
Schenectady, New York, 440 pp.
Hvorslev, M.J., 1949. Subsurface exploration and sampling of
soils for civil engineering purposes; United States Army
Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi, 465 pp.
Ingersoll-Rand, 1976. The water well drilling equipment
selection guide; Ingersoll-Rand, Washington, New Jersey,
12pp.
Krynine, Dimitri P. and William R. Judd, 1957. Principles of
engineering geology and geotechnics; McGraw-Hill, New
York, New York, 730 pp.
Layne-Western Company, Inc., 1983. Water, geological and
mineral exploration utilizing dual-wall reverse circulation;
Product literature, Mission, Kansas, 8 pp.
Leach, Lowell E., Frank P. Beck, John T. Wilson and Don H.
Kampbell, 1988. Aseptic subsurface sampling techniques
for hollow-stem auger drilling; Proceedings of the Second
National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer
Restoration, Ground-Water Monitoring and Geophysical
Methods, vol. 1; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 31-51.
Mobile Drilling Company, 1982. Auger tools and accessories;
Catalog 182, Indianapolis, Indiana, 26 pp.
National Water Well Association of Australia, 1984. Drillers
training and reference manual; National Water Well
Association of Australia, St. Ives, South Wales, 267 pp.
Petroleum Extension Service, 1980. Principles of Drilling Fluid
Control; Petroleum Extension Service, University of Texas,
Austin, Texas, 215 pp.
Speedstar Division of Koehring Company, 1983. Well drilling
manual; National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio,
72pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Manual
of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental protection Agent y, Office of Water
supply EPA-570/9-75-001, 156 pp.
Zapico, Michael M., Samuel Vales and John A. Cherry, 1987.
A wireline piston core barrel for sampling cohesionless
sand and gravel below the water table; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 74-82.
71
-------
Section 5
Design Components of Monitoring Wells
Introduction
It is not possible to describe a "typical" ground-water
monitoring well because each monitoring well must be tailored
to suit the hydrogeologic setting, the type of contaminants to be
monitored, the overall purpose of the monitoring program and
other site-specific variables. However, it is possible to describe
the individual design components of monitoring wells. These
design components may be assembled in various configura-
tions to produce individual monitoring well installations suited
to site-specific conditions. Figure 21 illustrates the monitoring
well design components that are described in this chapter.
Well Casing
Purpose of the Casing
Casing is installed in a ground-water monitoring well to
provide access from the surface of the ground to some point in
the subsurface. The casing, associated seals and grout prevent
borehole collapse and interzonal hydraulic communication.
Access to the monitored zone is through the casing and into
either the open borehole or the screened intake. The casing thus
permits piezometric head measurements and ground-water
quality sampling.
General Casing Material Characteristics
Well casing can be made of any rigid tubular material.
Historically, the selection of a well casing material (predomi-
nantly for water supply wells) focused on structural strength,
durability in long-term exposure to natural ground-water envi-
ronments and ease of handling. Different materials have dem-
onstrated versatility in well casing applications, In the late
1970s, questions about the potential impact that casing materi-
als may have on the chemical integrity or "representativeness"
of a ground-water sample being analyzed in parts per million or
parts per billion were raised. Today the selection of appropriate
materials for monitoring well casing must take into account
several site-specific factors including 1) geologic environ-
ment, 2) natural geochemical environment, 3) anticipated well
depth, 4) types and concentrations of suspected contaminants
and 5) design life of the monitoring well. In addition, logistical
factors must also be considered including: 1) well drilling or
installation methods, 2) ease in handling, 3) cost and 4) avail-
ability.
The most frequently evaluated characteristics that directly
influence the performance of casing materials in ground-water
monitoring applications are 1) strength and 2) chemical resis-
tance/interference. These characteristics are discussed in more
detail below.
Strength-Related Characteristics —
Monitoring well casing must be strong enough to resist the
forces exerted on it by the surrounding geologic materials and
the forces imposed on it during installation (Figure 50). The
casing must also exhibit structural integrity for the expected
duration of the monitoring program under natural and man-
induced subsurface conditions. When casing strength is evalu-
ated, three separate yet related parameters are determined:
1) tensile strength, 2) compressive strength and 3) collapse
strength.
The tensile strength of a material is defined as the greatest
longitudinal stress the substance can bear without pulling the
material span. Tensile strength of the installed casing varies
with composition, manufacturing technique, joint type and
casing dimensions. For a monitoring well installation, the
selected casing material must have a tensile strength capable of
supporting the weight of the casing string when suspended from
the surface in an air-filled borehole. The tensile strength of the
casing joints is equally as important as the tensile strength of the
casing. Because the joint is generally the weakest point in a
casing string, the joint strength will determine the maximum
axial load that can be placed on the casing. By dividing the
tensile strength by the linear weight of casing, the maximum
theoretical depth to which a dry sting of casing can be sus-
pended in a borehole can be calculated. When the casing is in
a borehole partially filled with water, the buoyant force of the
water increases the length of casing that can be suspended. The
additional length of casing that can be suspended depends on
the specific gravity of the casing material.
The compressive strength of a material is defined as the
greatest compressive stress that a substance can bear without
deformation. Unsupported casing has a much lower compres-
sive strength than installed casing that has been properly
grouted and/or backfilled because vertical forces are greatly
diminished by soil friction. This friction component means that
the casing material properties are more significant to compres-
sive strength than is wall thickness. Casing failure due to
compressive strength limitation is generally not an important
factor in a properly installed monitoring well.
Equally important with tensile strength is the final strength-
related property considered in casing selection ~ collapse
strength. Collapse strength is defined as the capability of a
casing to resist collapse by any and all external loads to which
it is subjected both during and after installation. The resistance
of casing to collapse is determined primarily by outside diam-
eter and wall thickness. Casing collapse strength is proportional
to the cube of the wall thickness. Therefore, a small increase in
73
-------
Borehole
Casing Joint
Compressive Forces
Casing
Tensile (Pull-apart) Forces
Critical at Casing Joints
Collapse Forces
. (Critical at Greater Depths)
Well Intake (Screen)
Figure 50. Forces exerted on a monitoring well casing and screen during installation.
wall thickness provides a substantial increase in collapse strength.
Collapse strength is also influenced by other physical properties
of the casing material including stiffness and yield strength.
A casing is most susceptible to collapse during installation
before placement of the filter pack or annular seal materials
around the casing. Although it may collapse during develop-
ment once a casing is properly installed and therefore sup-
ported, collapse is otherwise seldom a point of concern (Na-
tional Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981).
External loadings on casing that may contribute to collapse
include:
1) net external hydrostatic pressure produced when
the static water level outside of the casing is
higher than the water level on the inside;
2) unsymmetrical loads resulting from uneven
placement of backfill and/or filterpack materials;
3) uneven collapse of unstable formations;
4) sudden release of backfill materials that have
temporariy bridged in the annulus;
5) weight of cement grout slurry and impact of heat
of hydration of grout on the outside of a partially
water-filled casing,
6) extreme drawdown inside the casing caused by
over pumping;
7) forces associated with well development that
produce large differential pressures on the casing;
and
8) forces associated with improper installation
procedures where unusual force is used to
counteract a borehole that is not straight or to
overcome buoyant forces.
Of these stresses, only external hydrostatic pressure can be
predicted and calculated with accuracy; others can be avoided
74
-------
by common sense and good practice. To provide sufficient
margin against possible collapse by all normally-anticipated
external loadings, a casing should be selected such that resis-
tance to collapse is more than required to withstand external
hydrostatic pressure alone. Generally, a safety factor of at least
two is recommended (National Water Well Association and
Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). According to Purdin (1980), steps
to minimize the possibility of collapse include:
1) drilling a straight, clean borehole;
2) uniformly distributing the filter-pack materials at
a slow, even rate;
3) avoiding the use of quick-setting (high
temperature) cements for thermoplastic casing
installation;
4) adding sand or bentonite to a cement to lower the
heat of hydration; and
5) controlling negative pressures inside the well
during development.
Chemical Resistance Characteristics —
Materials used for well casing in monitoring wells must be
durable enough to withstand galvanic electrochemical corro-
sion and chemical degradation. Metallic casing materials are
most subject to corrosion; thermoplastic casing materials are
most subject to chemical degradation. The extent to which these
processes occur depends on water quality within the formation
and changing chemical conditions such as fluctuations between
oxidizing and reducing states. Casing material must therefore
be chosen with a knowledge of the existing or anticipated
ground-water chemistry. When anticipated water quality is
unknown, it is prudent to use conservative materials to avoid
chemical or potential water quality problems. If ground-water
chemistry affects the structural integrity of the casing, the
products of casing deterioration may also adversely affect the
chemistry of water samples taken from the wells.
Chemical Interference Characteristics —
Materials used for monitoring well casing must not exhibit
a tendency to either sorb (take out of solution by either
adsorption or absorption) or leach chemical constituents from
or into the water that is sampled from the well. If a casing
material sorbs selected constituents from the ground water,
those constituents will either not be present in any water-quality
sample (a "false negative") or the level of constituents will be
reduced. Additionally, if ground-water chemistry changes over
time, the chemical constituents that were previously sorbed
onto the casing may begin to desorb and/or leach into the ground
water. In either situation, the water-quality samples are not
representative.
In the presence of aggressive aqueous solutions, chemical
constituents can be leached from casing materials. If this
occurs, chemical constituents that are not indicative of forma-
tion water quality may bedetected in samples collected from the
well. This "false positive" might be considered to be an indica-
tion of possible contamination when the constituents do not
relate to ground-water contamination per se, but rather to water
sample contamination contributed by the well casing material.
The selection of a casing material must therefore consider
potential interactions between the casing material and the
natural and the man-induced geochemical environment. It is
important to avoid "false positive" and especially "false nega-
tive" sample results.
Types of Casing Materials
Casing materials widely available for use in ground-water
monitoring wells can be divided into three categories:
1) fluoropolymer materials, including poly-
tetrafluoroethylene(PTFE), tetra.fluoroethylene
(TFE), fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP),
perfluoroalkoxy (PFA) and polyvinylidene
fluoride (PVDF);
2) metallic materials, including carbon steel, low-
carbon steel, galvanized steel and stainless steel
(304 and 316); and
3) thermoplastic materials, including polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) and acrylonitrilebutadene styrene
In addition to the three categories that are widely used,
fiberglass-reinforced materials including fiberglass-reinforced
epoxy (FRE) and fiberglass-reinforced plastic (FRP) have been
used for monitoring applications. Because these materials have
not yet been used in general application across the country, very
little data are available on characteristics and performances.
Therefore, fiberglass-reinforced materials are not considered
further herein.
Each material possesses strength-related characteristics
and chemical resistance/chemical interference characteristics
that influence its use in site-specific hydrogeologic and con-
taminant-related monitoring situations. These characteristics
for each of the three categories of materials are discussed below.
Fluoropolymer materials —
Fluoropolymers are man-made materials consisting of
different formulations of monomers (organic molecules) that
can be molded by powder metallurgy techniques or extruded
while heated. Fluoropolymer are technically included among
the thermoplastics, but possess a unique set of properties that
distinguish them from other thermoplastics. Fluoropolymer
are nearly totally resistant to chemical and biological attack,
oxidation, weathering and ultraviolet radiation; have a broad
useful temperature range (up to 550°F); have a high dielectric
constant: exhibit a low coefficient of friction; have anti-stick
properties; and possess a greater coefficient of thermal expan-
sion than most other plastics and metals.
There exist a variety of fluoropolymer materials that are
marketed under a number of different trademarks. Descriptions
and basic physical properties of some of the mom popular
fluoropolymer with appropriate trademarks are discussed
below.
Polytetrafluorethylene (PTFE)) was discovered by E.I.
DuPont de Nemours in 1938 and was available only to the
United States government until the end of World War II.
According to Hamilton (1985), four principal physical proper-
ties are
1) extreme temperature range ~ from -400°F to
+500"F in constant service;
2) outstanding electrical and thermal insulation;
75
-------
3) lowestcoefficientoffrictionofanysolidmaterial;
and
4) almost completely chemically inert, except for
some reaction with halogenated compounds at
elevated temperatures and pressures.
In addition, PTFE is flexible without the addition of
plasticizers and is fairly easily machined, molded or extruded.
PTFE is by far the most widely-used and produced
fluoropolymer. Trade names, manufacturers and countries of
origin of PTFE and other fluoropolymer materials are listed in
Table 24. Typical physical properties of the various
fluoropolymer materials are described in Table 25.
Fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) was also developed
by E.I. DuPont de Nemours and is perhaps the second most
widely used fluoropolymer. It duplicates nearly all of the
physical properties of PTFE except the upper temperature
range, which is 100°F lower. Production of FEP-finished
products is generally faster because FEP is melt-processible,
but raw materials costs are higher.
Perfluoroalkoxy (PFA) combines the best properties of
PTFE and FEP, but the former costs substantially more than
either of the other fluoropolymers. Polyvinylidene fluoride
(PVDF) is tougher and has a higher abrasion resistance than
other fluoropolymers and is resistant to radioactive environ-
ments. PVDF has a lower upper temperature limit than either
PTFE or PFA.
Care should be exercised in the use of trade names to
identify fluoropolymers. Some manufacturers use one trade
name to refer to several of their own different materials. For
example, DuPont refers to several of its fluoropolymer resins as
Teflon® although the products referred to have different physi-
cal properties and different fabricating techniques. These ma-
terials may not always be interchangeable in service.
For construction of ground-water monitoring wells,
fluoropolymers possess several advantages over other thermo-
plastics and metallic materials. For example, fluoropolymers
are almost completely inert to chemical attack, even by ex-
tremely aggressive acids (i.e., hydrofluoric, nitric, sulfuric and
Table 24. Trade Names, Manufacturers, and Countries of Origin for Various Fluoropolymer Materials
Chemical Formulation
Trade Name
Manufacturer
Country of Origin
PTFE (or TFE)- Polytetrafluoroethylene
FEP- Fluorinated ethylene propylene
PFA- Perfluoroalkoxy
PVDF- Polyvinyiidene fluoride
CTFE- Chlorotrifiuoroethylene
Teflon
Halon
Fluon
Hostaflon
Polyflon
Algoflon
Soriflon
Neoflon
Teflon
Neoflon
Teflon
Kynar
Kel-F
Diaflon
DuPont
Allied
Icl
Hoechs
Daikin
Montedison
Ugine Kuhlman
Daikin
DuPont
Daikin
DuPont
Pennwalt
3M
Daikin
USA, Holland, Japan
USA
UK, USA
W. Germany
Japan
Italy
France
Japan
USA, Japan,
Japan
USA, Japan,
USA
USA
Japan
Holland
Holland
Table 25. Typical Physical
Properties
Properties of Various Fluoropolymer Materials (After Norton Performance Plastics, 1985)
Units ASTM Method TFE FEP PFA E-CTFE
CTFE
Tensile strength @73°F
Elongation @73°F
Modulus@ 73°F
Tensile
Flexural
Elasticity in tension
Flexural strength@73°F
Izod impact strength
(1/2 X1/2-in. notched bar)
@+75°F
@-65°F
,
Tensile impact strength
@+73°F
@-65°F
Compressive stress @ 73°F
Specific gravity
psi
psi
psi
psi
ft. Ibs./in.
of notch
ft. Ibs./in.
of notch
ft.lbs./sq. in.
ft. Ibs./sq. in.
psi
D638-D651
D638
D638
D790
D747
D790
D256
D1822
D695
D792
2500-6000
150-600
45,000-115,000
70,000-110,000
58,000
Does not break
3,0
2.3
320
105
1700
2.14-2.24
2700-3100
250-330
95,000
250,000
Does not break
No break
2.9
1020
365
2,12-2.17
4000-4300
300-350
95,000-100
-
7000
200
240,000
,000240,000
Does not break 7000
No break
2.12-2.17
No break
1.68
4500-6000
80-250
206,000
238,000
1.5-3.0x1 0s
8500
5.0
4600-7400
2.10-2,13
Coefficient of friction
static & kinetic against
polished steel
Coefficient of linear
thermal-expansion
D696
0.05-0.08
5,5X10"5
0.06-0,09
5.5X10'5
0.05-0.06
6.7X10*
0.15-0,65
1 4X10"6
0.2-0,3
2.64X105
76
-------
hydrochloric) and organic solvents. In addition, sorption of
chemical constituents from solutions and leaching of materials
from the fluoropolymer chemical structure has been believed
to be minimal or non-existent. Although studies are still ongo-
ing, Reynolds and Gillham (1 985) indicate that extruded tubing
of at least one fluoropolymer (PTFE) is prone to absorption of
selected organic compounds, specifically 1,1,1 -trichloroethane,
1,1,2,2 -tetrachloroethane, hexachloroethane and
tetrachloroethane; a fifth organic compound studied, bromoform,
was not sorbed by PTFE. An observation of particular note
made by Reynolds and Gillham was that tetrachloroethane was
strongly and rapidly sorbed by the PTFE tubing such that
significant reductions in concentration occurred within minutes
of exposure to a solution containing the aforementioned or-
ganic compounds. These results indicate that PTFE may not be
as inert as previously thought. Barcelona and Helfrich (1988)
provide a review of laboratory and field studies of well casing
material effects.
Although numerous such wells have been successfully
installed, there may be some potential drawbacks to using
fluoropolymer as monitoring well casing materials. For ex-
ample, PTFE is approximately 10 times more expensive than
PVC. In addition, fluoropolymer materials are more difficult to
handle than most other well casing materials. Fluoropolymer
materials are heavier and less rigid than other thermoplastics
and slippery when wet because of a low coefficient of friction.
Dablow et al. (1988) discuss installation of fluoropolymer wells
and address some of the potential difficulties. As they point out,
several strength-related properties of fluoropolymer (PTFE in
particular) must be taken into consideration during the well
design process, including: 1) pull-out resistance of flush-joint
threaded couplings (tensile strength); 2) compressive strength
of the intake section; and 3) flexibility of the casing string.
The tensile strength of fluoropolymer casing joints is the
limiting factor affecting the length of casing that can be sup-
ported safely in a dry borehole. According to Dablow et al.
(1988), experimental work conducted by DuPont indicates that
PTFE threaded joints will resist a pull-out load of approxi-
mately 900 pounds. With a safety factor of two, 2-inch schedule
40PTFE well casing with a weight of approximately 1.2pounds
per foot should be able to be installed to a depth of approxi-
mately 375 feet. Barcelona et al. (1985a) suggest that the
recommended hang length not exceed 320 feet. In either case,
this is less than one tenth the tensile strength of an equivalent-
sized thermoplastic (i.e., PVC) well casing material. Addition-
ally, because the specific gravity of PTFE% is much higher than
that of thermoplastics (about 2.2), the buoyant force of water is
not great. However, the buoyant force is sufficient to increase
the maximum string length by approximately 10 percent for that
portion of the casing materiaJ in contact with water.
Compressive strength of fluoropolymer well casings and
particularly intakes is also a recognized problem area. A low
compressive stress when compared to other thermoplastics may
lead to failure of the fluoropolymer casing at the threaded joints
where the casing is weakest and the stress is greatest. According
to Dablow et al. (1988), the "ductile" behavior of PTFE has
resulted in the partial closing of intake openings with a conse-
quent reduction in well efficiency in deep fluoropolymer wells.
Dablow et al. (1988) suggest that this problem can be minimized
by designing a larger slot size than is otherwise indicated by the
sieve analyses. In compressive strength tests conducted by
DuPont to determine the amount of deformation in PTFE well
intakes that occurs under varying compressive stresses, a linear
relationship was demonstrated between applied stress and the
amount of intake deformation. This relationship is graphically
presented in FigureSl. From this graph, the anticipated intake
opening deformation can be determined and included in intake
design by calculating the load and adding anticipated intake
opening deformation to the intake opening size determined by
sieve analysis.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Compassion Load - Lbs.
Note: Short Term Test -10 Minutes
Figure 51. Static compression results of Teflon* sceen (Dablow
et al., 1988).
'Dupont's registered trademark for Its fluorocarbon
resin
According to Dablow et al. (1988), a recommended con-
struction procedure to minimize compressive stress problems is
to keep the casing string suspended in the borehole so that the
casing is in tension and to backfill the annulus around the casing
while it remains suspended. This procedure reduces compres-
sive stress by supplying support on the outer wall of the casing.
This can only be accomplished successfully in relatively shal-
low wells in which the long-term tensile strength of the
fluoropolymer casing is sufficient to withstand tensile stresses
imposed on the casing by suspending it in the borehole. Addi-
tionally, continuous suspension of casing in the borehole is not
possible with hollow-stem auger installations.
The third area of concern in fluoropolymer well casing
installation is the extreme flexibility of the casing string.
Although easy solutions exist to avoid problems, the flexibility
otherwise could cause the casing to become bowed and non-
plumb when loaded, and the resulting deformation could cause
difficulties in obtaining samples or accurate water levels from
these wells. Dablow et al. (1988) suggest three means of
avoiding flexibility problems: 1) suspending the casing string
in the borehole during backfilling (as discussed above); 2) using
casing centralizers; or 3) inserting a rigid PVC or steel pipe
temporarily inside the fluoropolymer casing during backfilling.
Metallic Materials —
Metallic well casing and screen materials available for use
in monitoring wells include carbon steel, low carbon steel,
77
-------
galvanized steel and stainless steel. Well casings made of any
of these metallic materials are generally stronger, more rigid
and less temperature sensitive than thermoplastics,
fluoropolymer or fiberglass-reinforced epoxy casing materials.
Table 26 describes dimensions, hydraulic collapse pressure,
burst pressure and unit weight of stainless steel casing. The
strength and rigidity capabilities of metallic casing materials
are sufficient to meet virtually any subsurface condition en-
countered in a ground-water monitoring situation. However,
metallic materials are subject to corrosion during long-term
exposure to certain subsurface geochemical environments.
Corrosion of metallic well casings and well intakes can
both limit the useful life of the monitoring well installation and
result in ground-water sample analytical bias. It is important,
therefore, to select both casing and screen that are fabricated of
corrosion-resistant materials.
Corrosion is defined as the weakening or destruction of a
material by chemical action. Several well-defined forms of
corrosive attack on metallic materials have been observed and
defined. In all forms, corrosion proceeds by electrochemical
action, and water in contact with the metal is an essential factor.
According to Driscoll (1986), the forms of corrosion typical in
environments in which well casing and well intake materials
are installed include:
1) general oxidation or "rusting" of the metallic
surface, resulting in uniform destruction of the
surface with occasional perforation in some areas;
2) selective corrosion (dezincification) or loss of
one element of an alloy, leaving a structurally
weakened material;
3) hi-metallic corrosion, caused by the creation of a
galvanic cell at or near the juncture of two different
metals;
4) pitting corrosion, or highly localized corrosion by
pitting or perforation, with little loss of metal
outside of these areas; and
5) stress corrosion, or corrosion induced in areas
where the metal is highly stressed.
To determine the potential for corrosion of metallic
materials, the natural geochemical conditions must first be
determined. The following list of indicators can help recognize
Portentially corrosive conditions (modified from Driscoll, 1986):
1) low pH ~ if ground water pH is less than 7.0,
water is acidic and corrosive conditions exist;
2) high dissolved oxygen content ~ if dissolved
oxygen content exceeds 2 milligrams per liter,
corrosive water is indicated;
3) presence of hydrogen sulfide (H^S) ~ presence of
HjS in quantities as low as 1 milligram per liter
can cause severe corrosion;
4) total dissolved solids (TDS) - if TDS is greater
than 1000 milligrams per liter, the electrical
conductivity of the water is great enough to cause
serious electrolytic corrosion;
5) carbon dioxide (CO) -- corrosion is likely if the
CO2 content of the water exceeds 50 milligrams
per liter; and
6) chloride ion (Cl) content -- if Cl content exceeds
500 milligramsperliter, corrosion can be expected.
Combinations of any of these corrosive conditions generally
increase the corrosive effect, However, no data presently exist
on the expected life of steel well casing materials exposed to
natural subsurface geochemical conditions.
Carbon steels were produced primarily to provide in-
creased resistance to atmospheric corrosion.. Achieving this
Table 26. Hydraulic Collapse and Burst Pressure and Unit Weight of Stainless Steal Well Casing (Dave Kill, Johnson Division, St.
Paul, Minnesota, Personal Communication, 1965)
Norn.
Size
Inches
2
2112
3
3 1/2
4
5
6
Schedule
Number
5
10
40
80
5
10
40
5
10
40
5
10
40
5
10
40
5
10
40
5
10
40
Outside
Diameter,
Inches
2.375
2.375
2.375
2.375
2.875
2.875
2.875
3.600
3.500
3.6QO
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.500
4.500
4.500
5.563
5.663
5.563
6.625
6.625
6.625
Wall
Thickness
Inches
0.065
0.109
0.154
0.218
0.083
0,120
0.203
0.063
0.120
0.216
0.063
0.120
0.226
0.063
0.120
0.237
0.109
0.134
0,258
0.109
0.134
0.280
Internal
Inside Cross-Sectional
Diameter Area
Inches Sq. In.
2.245
2.157
2.067
1.939
2.709
2.635
2.469
3.334
3.260
3.068
3.834
3.760
3.548
4.334
4.260
4.026
5.345
5.295
5.047
6.407
6.357
6.065
3.958
3.654
3.356
2.953
5.761
5.450
4.785
8.726
8.343
7.369
11.54
11.10
9.667
14.75
14.25
12.72
22.43
22,01
20.00
32.22
31.72
28.89
Internal Pressure
psi
Test. Bursting
820
1.375
1.945
2.500
865
1.250
2.118
710
1.030
1.851
620
900
1.695
555
800
1.560
587
722
1.391
484
606
1.268
4.105
6.664
9.726
13.766
4.330
6.260
10.591
3.557
5.142
9.257
3.112
4.500
8.475
2.766
4.000
7.900
2.949
3.613
6.957
2.467
3.033
6.340
External
Pressure
psi
Collapsing
896
2.196
3.526
5.419
1.001
1$05
3.931
639
1.375
3.307
431
1.081
2.941
316
845
2.672
350
665
2.231
129
394
1.942
Weight
Pounds
per Foot
1.619
2.663
3.087
5.069
2.498
3.564
5.347
3.057
4.372
7.647
3.505
5.019
9.194
3.952
5.666
10.891
6.409
7.642
14.764
7.656
9.376
19.152
78
-------
increased resistance requires that the material be subjected to
alternately wet and dry conditions. In most monitoring wells,
water fluctuations are not sufficient in either duration or occur-
rence to provide the conditions that minimize corrosion.
Therefore, corrosion is a frequent problem. The difference
between the corrosion resistance of carbon and low-carbon
steels is negligible under conditions in which the materials are
buried in soils or in the saturated zone; thus both materials may
be expected to corrode approximately equally. Corrosion prod-
ucts include iron and manganese and trace metal oxides as well
as various metal sulfides (Barcelona et al, 1983). Under oxi-
dizing conditions, the principal products are solid hydrous
metal oxides; under reducing conditions, high levels of dis-
solved metallic corrosion products can be expected (Barcelona
et rd., 1983). While the electroplating process of galvanizing
improves the corrosion resistance of either carbon or low-
carbon steel, in many subsurface environments the improvement
is only slight and short-term. The products of corrosion of
galvanized steel include iron, manganese, zinc and trace cad-
mium species (Barcelona et al., 1983).
The presence of corrosion products represents a high
potential for the alteration of ground-water sample chemical
quality. The surfaces on which corrosion occurs also present
potential sites for a variety of chemical reactions and adsorp-
tion. These surface interactions can cause significant changes in
dissolved metal or organic compounds in ground water
samples (Marsh and Lloyd, 1980). According to Barcelona et
al. (1983), even flushing the stored water from the well casing
prior to sampling may not be sufficient to minimize this source
of sample bias cause the effects of the disturbance of surface
coatings or accumulated corrosion products in the bottom of the
well are difficult, if not impossible, to predict. On the basis of
these observations, the use of carbon steel, low-carbon steel and
galvanized steel in monitoring well construction is not consid-
ered prudent in most natural geochemical environments.
Conversely, stainless steel performs well inmost corrosive
environments, particularly under oxidizing conditions. In fact,
stainless steel requires exposure to oxygen in order to attain its
highest corrosion resistance oxygen combines with part of the
stainless steel alloy to form an invisible protective film on the
surface of the metal. As long as the film remains intact, the
corrosion resistance of stainless steel is very high. Recent work
by Barcelona and Helfrich (1986; 1988) and Barcelona et al.
(1988) suggest that biological activity may alter geochemistry
near stainless steel wells. Iron bacteria may induce degradation
of the well casing and screen.
Several different types of stainless steel alloys arc avail-
able. The most common alloys used for well casing and screen
are Type 304 and Type 316. Type 304 stainless steel is perhaps
the most practical ;rom a corrosion resistance and cost stand-
point. It is composed of slightly more than 18 percent chromium
and more than 8 percent nickel, with about 72 percent iron and
not more than 0.08 percent carbon (Driscoll, 1986). The chro-
mium and nickel give the 304 alloy excellent resistance to
corrosion; the low carbon content improves weldability. Type
316 stainless steel is compositionally similar to Type 304 with
one exception - a 2 to 3 percent molybdenum content and a
higher nickel content that replaces the equivalent percentage of
iron. This compositional difference provides Type 316 stain-
less steel with an improved resistance to sulfur-containing
species as well as sulfuric acid solutions (Barcelona et al.,
1983). This means that Type 316 performs better under reduc-
ing conditions than Type 304. According to Barcelona et al.
(1983), Type 316 stainless steel is less susceptible to pitting or
pinhole corrosion caused by organic acids or halide solutions.
However, Barcelona et al. (1983) also point out that for either
formulation of stainless steel, long-term exposure to very
corrosive conditions may result in corrosion and the subsequent
chromium or nickel contamination of samples.
Thermoplastic Materials —
Thermoplastics are man-made materials that are composed
of different formulations of large organic molecules. These
formulations soften by heating and harden upon cooling and
therefore can easily be molded or extruded into a wide variety
of useful shapes including well casings, fittings and accesso-
ries.
The most common types of thermoplastic well casing are
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene
(ABS). Casing made of these materials is generally weaker, less
rigid and more temperature-sensitive than metallic casing ma-
terials. However, casing made of either types of plastic can
usually be selected where the strength, rigidity and temperature
resistance are generally sufficient to withstand stresses during
casing handling, installation and earth loading (National Water
Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). Thermo-
plastics also: 1) offer complete resistance to galvanic and
electrochemical corrosion; 2) are light weight for ease of
installation and reduced shipping costs; 3) have high abrasion
resistance; 4) have high strength-to-weight ratios; 5) are du-
rable in natural ground-water environments; 6) require low
maintenance; 7) are flexible and workable for ease of cutting
and joining and 8) are relatively low in cost.
Long-term exposures of some formulations of thermoplas-
tics to the ultraviolet rays of direct sunlight and/or to low
temperatures will cause brittleness and gradual loss of impact
strength that may be significant. The extent of this degradation
depends on the type of plastic, the extent of exposure and the
susceptibility of the casing to mechanical damage (National
Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 198 1). Many
thermoplastic formulations now include protection against
degradation by sunlight, but brittleness of casing, particularly
during casing installation remains a problem. Above-ground
portions of thermoplastic well casings should be suitably pro-
tected from breakage. Potential chemical problems are dis-
cussed in the following sections.
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)-PVC plastics are produced by
combining PVC resin with various types of stabilizers, lubri-
cants, pigments, fillers, plasticizers and processing aids. The
amounts of these additives can be varied to produce different
PVC plastics with properties tailored to specific applications.
PVC used for well casing is composed of a rigid unplasticized
polymer formulation (PVC Type 1) that is strong and generally
has good chemical resistance. However, several publications
(e.g., Barcelona et al., 1983; Barcelona and Helfrich, 1988; and
Nass, 1976) raised questions of chemical resistance to low
molecular weight ketones, aldehydes and chlorinated solvents
which may limit durability of the casing.
PVC materials are classified according to ASTM standard
specification D-1785 that covers rigid PVC compounds (Ameri-
79
-------
can Society for Testing and Materials, 1986). This standard
categorizes rigid PVC by numbered cells designating value
ranges for certain pertinent properties and characteristics in-
cluding impact strength, tensile strength, rigidity (modulus of
elasricity) temperature resistance (deflection temperature) and
chemical resistance. ASTM standard specification F-480 cov-
ers thermoplastic water well casing pipe and couplings made in
standard dimension ratios. This standard specifies that PVC
well casing can be made from only a limited number of cell
classification materials, predominantly PVC 12454-B, but also
including PVC 12454-C and PVC 14333-C and D (American
Society for Testing and Materials, 198 1). Minimum physical
property values for these materials are given in Table 27.
Hydraulic collapse pressure and unit weight for a range of PVC
well casing diameters is given in Table 28.
Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS)--ABS plastics are
produced from three different monomers: 1) acrylonitrile, 2)
butadiene and 3) styrene. The ratio of the components and the
way in which they are combined can be varied to produce
plastics with a wide range of properties. Acrylonitrile contrib-
utes rigidity, impact strength, hardness, chemical resistance
and heat resistance; butadiene contributes impact strength;
styrene contributes rigidity, gloss and ease of manufacturing
(National Water Well Association arid Plastic Pipe Institute,
1918 1). ABS used for well casing is a ngid, strong unplasticized
polymer formulation that has good heat resistance and impact
strength.
Two ABS material types are used for well casings: 1) a
higher strength, high rigidity, moderate impact resistance ABS
and 2) a lower strength and rigidity, high impact strength ABS,
These two materials are identified as cell class 434 and 533,
respectively by ASTM standard specification F-480 (Ameri-
can Society for Testing and Materials, 198 1). Minimum physi-
cal property values for ABS well casing are given in Table 27.
The high temperature resistance and the ability of ABS to retain
other properties better at high temperatures is an advantage in
wells in which grouting causes a high heat of hydration.
Hydraulic collapse pressure for a range of ABS well casing
diameters is given in Table 29.
General strength/chemical resistance and/or interference
characteristics-The tensile strength of thermoplastics is rela-
tively low in comparison to metallic materials, but the devel-
oped string loading is not a limiting factor because the thermo-
plastic well casing is lighter weight than metallic materials.
Table 27 shows the physical properties of thermoplastic well
casing materials. The tensile strength, which in part determines
the length of casing string that can be suspended in the borehole
is relatively large. According to calculations by the National
Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute (198 1),
permissible casing string lengths even in unsaturated boreholes
exceed the typical borehole depths of monitoring wells. In
boreholes where the casing is partially immersed, casing string
length is even less of a problem because the thermoplastics are
low in density and therefore relatively buoyant.
With respect to chemical resistance, thermoplastic well
casing materials are non-conductors and therefore do not cor-
rode either electrochemically or galvanically like metallic
materials. In addition, thermoplastics are resistant to biological
attack and to chemical attack by soil, water and other naturally-
occurring substances present in the subsurface (National Water
Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981). However,
thermoplastics are susceptible to chemical attack by high con-
centrations of certain organic solvents, and long term exposure
to lower levels has as yet undocumented effects. This physical
degradation of a plastic by an organic solvent is called solva-
tion. Solvent cementing of thermoplastic well casings is based
on solvation. Solvation occurs in the presence of very high
concentrations of specific organic solvents. If these solvents,
which include tetrahydrofuran (THF), methyl ethyl ketone
(MEK), methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) and cyclohexanone,
are present in high enough concentrations, the solvents can be
expected to chemically degrade thermoplastic well casing.
However, the extent of this degradation is not known. In
general, the chemical attack on the thermoplastic polymer
matrix is enhanced as the organic content of the solution with
which it is in contact increases.
Barcelona et al. (1983) and the Science Advisory Board of
the U.S. EPA list the groups of chemical compounds that may
cause degradation of the thermoplastic polymer matrix and/or
the release of compounding ingredients that otherwise will
remain in the solid material. These chemical compounds in-
clude 1) low molecular weight ketones, 2) aldehydes, 3)
amines and 4) chlorinated alkenes and alkanes. Recent reports
of creosotes and petroleum distillates causing disintegration of
PVC casing support Barcelona's findings. There is currently a
lack of information regarding critical concentrations of these
chemical compounds at which deterioration of the thermoplas-
tic material is significant enough to affect either the structural
integrity of the material or the ground-water sample chemical
quality.
Among the potential sources of chemical interference in
thermoplastic well casing materials are the basic monomers
from which the casing is made and a variety of additives that
may be used in the manufacture of the casing including plasti-
cizers, stabilizers, fillers, pigments and lubricants. The propen-
sity of currenty available information on potential contamina-
tion of water that comes in contact with rigid thermoplastic
materials relates specifically to PVC; no information is cur-
rently available on ABS or on other similar thermoplastics.
Therefore, the remainder of this discussion relates to potential
chemical interference effects from PVC well casing materials.
Extensive research has been conducted in the laboratory
and in the field, specifically on water supply piping, to evaluate
vinyl chloride monomer migration from new and old PVC pipe,
The data support the conclusion that when PVC is in contact
with water, the level of trace vinyl chloride migration from PVC
pipe is extremely low compared to residual vinyl chloride
monomer (RVCM) in PVC pipe. Since 1976, when the National
Sanitation Foundation established an RVCM monitoring and
control program for PVC pipe used in potable water supplies
and well casing, process control of RVCM levels in PVC pipe
has improved markedly. According to Barcelona et al. (1983),
the maximum allowable level of RVCM in NSF-certified PVC
products (less than or equal to 10 ppm RVCM) limits potential
leached concentrations of vinyl chloride monomer to 1 to 2
micrograms per liter. Leachable amounts of vinyl chloride
monomer should decrease as RVCM levels in products continue
to be reduced. Although the potential for analytical interference
exists even at the low micrograms per-liter level at which vinyl
-------
Table 27. Typical Physical Properties of Thermoplastic Well Casing Materials at 73.4° (National Water Well Association and Plastic
Pipe institute, 1981)
Property
Specific Gravity
Tensile Strength, Ibs. /in.2
Tensile Modulus of Elasticity, Ibs/m.2
Compressive Strength, Ibs./in.2
Impact Strength, Izod, ft. -Ib/inch notch
Deflection Temperature Under Load
(264 psi), "F
Coefficent of Linear Expansion,
in./in. - °F
ASTM Test
D-792
D-638
D-638
D-695
D-256
D-648
D-696
Cell Class,
per D-1788
Method 434
1.05
6,000'
360,000
7,200
4.0*
190"
5.5 X10 6
533
1.04
5,000'
250,000
4,500
6.0*
190"
6.0X106
PVC
Cell Class,
per 0-1784
12454-B & C 14333-C & D
1,40
7,000*
400,000*
9,000
0.65
168*
3.0X10-5
1.35
6,000*
320,000'
6,000
5.0
14tY
5.0 X105
.These are minimum values set by the corresponding ASTM Cell Class designation. All others represent typical values.
Table 28. Hydraulic Collapse Pressure and Unit Weight of PVC Well Casing (National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe
institute, 1981)
Outside Diameter
(inches) SCH*
Nom. Actual
2
2112
3
3112
4
41/2
5
6
2.375
2.875
3.500
4.000
4.500
4.950
5.663
6.625
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
Wail
Thickness
Min. (in.)
0.218
0.154
0.276
0.203
0.300
0.216
0.316
0.226
0.337
0.237
0.248
0.190
0.375
0.258
0.432
0.280
D R
10.9
15.4
10.4
14.2
11.7
16.2
12,6
17.7
13.3
19.0
20.0
26.0
14.5
21.6
15.3
23.7
Weight in Air
(lbs/100 feet)
PVC 12454 PVC14333
94
69
144
109
193
143
235
172
282
203
235
182
391
276
538
356
91
66
139
105
186
138
227
176
272
196
226
176
377
266
519
345
Weight in Water
(lbs/100 feet)
PVC 12454 PVC 14333
27
20
41
31
55
41
67
49
80
58
67
52
112
79
164
102
24
17
36
27
48
36
59
43
70
51
58
46
98
69
134
89
Hydraulic Collapse
Pressure (psi)
PVC 12454 PVC 14333
947
307
1110
400
750
262
589
197
494
158
134
59
350
105
314
78
756
246
885
320
600
210
471
156
395
126
107
47
260
84
171
62
.Schedule
Table 29. Hydraulic Collapae Pressure and Unit Weight of ABS Well Casing (National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe
Institute, 1981)
Outside Diameter
(inches) SCH*
Nom. Actual
2
21/2
3
3112
4
5
6
2.375
2.875
3.500
4.000
4.500
5.563
6.250
SCH 80
SCH 40
"SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
SCH 80
SCH 40
Wall
Thickness
Min. (in.)
0.218
0.154
0.276
0.203
0.300
0.216
0.318
0.226
0.337
0.237
0.375
0.258
0.432
0.280
DR**
10.9
15.4
10.4
14.2
11.7
16.2
12.6
17.7
13.3
19.0
14.6
21.6
15.3
23.7
Weight in Air
(lbs/100 feet)
ABS 434 ABS 533
71
52
108
82
145
107
176
129
211
152
294
207
404
268
70
51
107
81
144
106
175
128
209
151
291
205
400
266
Weight in Water
(lbs/100 feet)
ABS 434 ABS 533
3.4
2.5
5.1
3.9
6.9
5,1
8.4
6.1
10.0
7.2
14.0
9.8
19.2
12.8
2.7
2.0
4.1
3.1
5.5
4.1
6.7
4.9
8.0
5.8
11.2
7.9
15.4
10.2
Hydraulic Collapse
Pressure (psi)
ABS 434 ABS 533
829
269
968
350
656
229
515
173
432
138
306
92
275
69
592
192
691
250
466
164
368
124
308
98
218
66
196
49
-------
chloride monomer may be found in a solution in contact with
PVC, the significance of this interference is not currently
known.
With few exceptions, plasticizers are not added to PVC
formulations used for well casing because the casing must be
a rigid material. Even if plasticizers were added, levels would
not be expected to exceed 0.01 percent (Barcelona et al, 1983).
By contrast, flexible PVC tubing may contain from 30 to 50
percent plasticizers by weight. The presence of these high levels
of plasticizers in flexible PVC tubing has been documented to
produce significant chemical interference effects by several
researchers (Barcelona et al., 1985b; Barcelona, 1984; Barcelona
et al., 1983; Junket al., 1974). However, at the levels present in
rigid well casing, plasticizers were not reported to pose a
chemical interference problem.
Rigid PVC may contain other additives, primarily stabiliz-
ers, at levels approaching 5 percent by weight. Some represen-
tative chemical classes of additives that have been used in the
manufacture of rigid PVC well casing are listed in Table 30.
Boettner et al. (1981) determined through a laboratory study
that several of the PVC heat stabilizing compounds, notably
dimethyltin and dibutyltin species, could potentially leach out
of rigid PVC at very low (low to sub micrograms per liter)
levels. These levels decreased dramatically over time. Factors
that influenced the leaching process in this study included
solution pH, temperature and ionic composition; and exposed
surface area and surface porosity of the pipe material. It is
currently unclear what impact, if any, the leaching of low levels
of organotin compounds may have on analytical interference.
In addition to setting a limit on RVCM, the National
Sanitation Foundation has set specifications for certain chemi-
cal constituents in PVC formulations. The purpose of these
specifications as outlined in NSF Standard 14 (National Sani-
tation Foundation, 1988) is to control the amount of chemical
additives in both PVC well casing and pipe used for potable
water supply. The maximum contaminant levels permitted in a
standardized leach test on NSF-approved PVC products are
given in Table31. Most of these levels correspond to those set
by the Safe Drinking Water Act for chemical constituents
covered by the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Stan-
dards. Only PVC products that carry either the "NSF we" (well
casing) or "NSF pw" (potable water) designation have met the
specifications set forth in Standard 14. Other non-NSF listed
products may include in their formulation chemical additives
not addressed by the specifications or may carry levels of the
listed chemical parameters higher than permitted by the speci-
fications. In all cases, the material used should be demonstrated
to be compatible with the specific applications. For exam pie,
even though neither lead nor cadmium have been permitted as
compounding ingredients in United States-manufactured NSF-
listed PVC well casing since 1970, PVC manufactured in other
countries may be stabilized with lead or cadmium compounds
that have been demonstrated to leach from the PVC (Barcelona
etal, 1983).
In other laboratory studies of leaching of PVC well casing
material chemical components into water, Curran and Tomson
(1983) and Parker and Jenkins (1986) determined that little or
no leaching occurred. In the former study, it was found when
testing several different samples (brands) of rigid PVC well
casing that trace organics either were not leached or were
leached only at the sub-micrograms per liter level. In the latter
study, which was conducted using ground water in contact with
two different brands of PVC, it was concluded that no chemical
constituents were leached at sufficient concentrations to inter-
fere with reversed-phase analysis for low micrograms per liter
levels of 2,4,6 trinitrotoluene (TNT), hexahydro-1,3,5 trinitro-
1,3,5-tnazme (RDX), octahydro-1,3,5,7 -tetramtro-1,3,5,7-
tetrazocine (HMX) or 2,4 dinitrotoluene (DNT) in solution. The
study by Curran and Tom son (1983) confirmed previous field
work at Rice University (Tom son et al., 1979) that suggested
that PVC well casings did not leach significant amounts (i.e. at
the sub-micrograms per liter level) of trace organics into
sampled ground water.
Another potential area for concern with respect to chemical
interference effects is the possibility that some chemical con-
stituents could be sorbed by PVC well casing materials. Miller
(1982) conducted a laboratory study to determine whether
several plastics, including rigid PVC well casing, exhibited any
tendency to sorb potential contaminants from solution. Under
the conditions of his test, Miller found that PVC moderately
sorbed tetrachloroethylene and strongly sorbed lead, but did not
sorb trichlorofluoromethane, trichloroethylene, bromoform,
1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,1,2-trichloroethane or chromium. In this
experiment, sorption was measured weekly for six weeks and
compared to a control; maximum sorption of tetrachloroethylene
occurred at two weeks. While Miller (1982) attributed these
losses of tetrachloroethylene and lead strictly to sorption, the
anomalous behavior of tetrachloroethylene compared to that
for other organics of similar structure (i.e., trichloroethlyene) is
not explained. In a follow-up study to determine whether or not
the tetrachloroethylene could be desorbed and recovered, only
a small amount of tetrachloroethylene was desorbed. Thus,
whether or not strong sorption or some other mechanism (i.e.,
enhanced biodegradation in the presence of PVC) accounts for
the difference is not clear (Parker and Jenkins, 1986). In the
laboratory study by Parker and Jenkins (1986), it was found that
significant losses of TNT and HMX from solution occurred in
the presence of PVC well casing. A follow-up study to deter-
mine the mechanism for the losses attributed the losses to
increased microbial degradation rather than to sorption. These
results raise questions regarding whether or not losses found in
other laboratory or even field studies that did not consider
biodegradation as a loss mechanism could be attributed to
biodegradation rather than to sorption.
In another laboratory study, Reynolds and Gillham (1985)
found that sorption of selected organics (specifically 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, bromoform, hexa-
chloroethane and tetrachloroethylene) onto PVC and other
polymeric well casing materials could be a significant source of
bias to ground-water samples collected from water standing in
the well. PVC was found to slowly sorb four of the five
compounds studied (all except 1,1,1-trichloroethane), such that
sorption bias would likely not be significant for the sorbed
compounds if well development (purging the well of stagnant
water) and sampling were to take place in the same day.
It is clear that with few exceptions the work that has been
done to determine chemical interference effects of PVC well
casing (whether by leaching from or sorbing to PVC of chemi-
cal constituents) has been conducted under laboratory condi-
82
-------
tions. Furthermore, in most of the laboratory work the PVC has
been exposed to a solution (usually distilled, deionized, or
"organic-free" water) over periods of time ranging from several
days to several months. Thus the PVC had a period of time in
which to exhibit sorption or leaching effects. While this may be
comparable to a field situation in which ground water was
exposed to the PVC well casing as it may be between sampling
rounds, few studies consider the fact that prior to sampling, the
well casing is usually purged of stagnant water residing in the
casing between sampling rounds. Thus, the water that would
have been affected by the sorption or leaching effects of PVC
would ideally have been removed and replaced with aquifer-
quality water that is eventually obtained as "representative" of
existing ground-water conditions. Because the sample is gen-
erally taken immediately after purging of stagnant water, the
sampled water will have had a minimum of time with which to
come in contact with casing materials and consequently be
affected by sorption or leaching effects. Because of this,
Barcelona et al. (1983) suggest that the potential sample bias
due to sorptive interactions with well casing materials maybe
discounted. They point out that these effects are far more critical
in sample transfer and storage procedures employed prior to
sample separation or analysis. Nevertheless, other researchers
do not agree that purging avoids casing effects especially for
wells that recover slowly and thereby allow ample time for
surface reactions to occur.
Composite Alternative Materials —
In certain conditions it maybe advantageous to design a
well using more than one material for well components. For
example, where stainless steel or fluoropolymer materials are
preferred in a specific chemical environment, considerable cost
savings may be realized by using PVC in non-critical portions
of the well. These savings may be considerable especially in
deep wells where only the lower portion of the well has a critical
chemical environment and tens of feet of lower-cost PVC may
be used in the upper portion of the well. In composite well
designs the use of dissimilar metallic components should be
avoided unless an electrically isolating design is incorporated
(United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Coupling Procedures for Joining Casing
Only a limited number of methods are available for joining
lengths of casing or casing and screen together. The joining
method depends on the type of casing and type of casing joint.
Figure 52 illustrates some common types of joints used for
Table 30. Representative Classes of Additives In Rigid PVC Materials Used for Pipe or Well Casing (Barcelona et al., 1983)
(Concentration in wt. %)
Heat stabilizer* (0.2-1.0%)
Dibutyltin diesters of lauric and maleic acids
Dibutyltin bis (laurylmercaptide)
Dibutyltin-B mercaptopropionate
di-n-octyltin maleate
di-n-octyltin-S.S'-bis isoctyl mercaptoacetate
di-n-octyltin-8 mercaptopropionate
Various other alky I tin compounds
Various proprietary antimony compounds
Filler* (1-5%)
CaCO,
diatomaceous earth
clays
pigments
T,02
carbon black
iron and other metallic oxides
Lubricant* (1-5%)
stearic acid
calcium stearate
glycerol monostearate
montan wax
polyethylene wax
Table 31. Chemical Parameter* Covered by NSF Standard 14 (National Sanitation Foundation, 1988)
Parameter
Antimony (Sb)
Arsenic (As)
Barium(Ba)
Cadmium (Cd)
Chromium (Cr)
Lead(Pb)
Mercury (Hg)
Phenolic substances
Residual vinyl chloride monomer (RVCM)
Selenium (Se) *
Total dissolved solids
Tin (Sn)
Total trihalomethanes (TTHM)
Taste and Odor Evaluations
Characteristic
Odor
Taste
Maximum Permissible Level mg/L (ppm)
0.050
0.0501
1.0'
0.010'
0.0501
0.0201
0.00201
0.050
2.0
0.010'
70.0
0.050
0.10
Permissible Level
Cold application 40
Hot application 50
Satisfactory
1 Established in the U.S. EPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
*ln the finished product ppm (mg/kg).
83
-------
Couplin
a. Flush-joint Casing
(Joined by Solvent Welding)
b. Threaded, Flush-joint Casing
(Joined by Threading Casing
Together)
Plain Square-end Casing
(Joined by Solvent Welding
with Couplings)
li
1
d. Threaded Casing
(Joined by Threaded Couplings)
e. Bell-end Casing
(Joined by Solvent Welding)
f. Plain Square-end Casing
(Joined by Heat Welding)
Figure 52. Types of joints typically used between casing lengths.
assembling lengths of casing. Flush-joint, threaded flush-joint,
plain square-end and bell-fend casing joints are typical of joints
available for plastic casing; threaded flush-joint, bell-end and
plain square end casing joints are typical of joints available for
metallic casing.
Fluoropolymer Casing Joining —
Because fluoropolymers are inert to chemical attack or
solvation even by pure solvents, solvent welding cannot be used
with fluoropolymers. Similar to thermoplastic casing joining in
techniques, threaded joints wrapped with fluoropolymer tape
are preferred.
Metallic Casing Joining —
There are generally two options available for joining
metallic well casings: 1) welding via application of heat or 2)
threaded joints. Both methods produce a casing string with a
relatively smooth inner and outer diameter. With welding, it is
generally possible to produce joints that are as strong or
stronger than the casing, thereby enhancing the tensile strength
of the casing string. The disadvantages of welding include: 1)
greater, assembly time, 2) difficulty in properly welding casing
the verthcal position, 3) enhancement or corrosion potential
in the vicinity of the weld and 4) the danger of ignition of
84
-------
Table 2. Federal Ground-Water Monitoring Provisions and Objectives (after Office of Technology Assessment, 1984)
Statutory authority
Monitoring provisions"
Monitoring objectives
Atomic Energy Act
Clean Water Act
-Sections 201 and 405
-Section 208
Coastal Zone Management Act
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act-
Section 3
Federal Land Policy and
Management Act (and
associated mining laws)
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Act
Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act
National Environmental
Policy Act
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for low-level radioactive
waste disposal sites. The facility license must specify the monitoring requirements
for the source. The monitoring program must include:
- Pre-operational monitoring program conducted over a 12-month period. Parameters
not specified.
- Monitoring during construction and operation to provide early warning of releases of
radionuclides from the site. Parameters and sampling frequencies not specified.
- Post-operational monitoring program to provide early warning of releases of
radionuclides from the site. Parameters and sampling frequencies not specified.
System design is based on operating history, closure, and stabilization of the site.
Ground-water monitoring related to the development of geologic repositories will be
conducted. Measurements will include the rate and location of water inflow into
subsurface areas and changes in ground-water conditions.
Ground-water monitoring may be conducted by DOE, as necessary, es part of
remedial action programs at storage and disposal facilities for radioactive
substances.
Ground-water monitoring requirements are established on a case-by-case basis
for the land application of wastewater and sludge from sewage treatment plants.
No explicit requirements are established; however, ground-water monitoring studies
are being conducted by SCS under the Rural Clean Water Program to evaluate
the impacts of agricultural practices and to design and determine the effectiveness
of Best Management Practices.
The statute does not authorize development of regulations for sources. Thus, any
ground-water monitoring conducted would be the result of requirement established
by a State plan (e.g., monitoring with respect to salt-water intrusion) authorized
and funded by CZMA.
Ground-water monitoring may be conducted by EPA (or a State) as necessary to
respond to releases of any hazardous substance, contaminant, or pollutant
(as defined by CERCLA).
No monitoring requirements established for pesticide users. However, monitoring
may be conducted by EPA in instances where certain pesticides are contaminating
ground water?
Ground-water monitoring is specified in Federal regulations for geothermal
recovery operations on Federal lands for a period of at least one year prior to
production. Parameters and monitoring frequency are not specified.
Explicit ground-water monitoring requirements for mineral operations on Federal
lands are not established in Federal Regulations. Monitoring maybe required
(as permit condition) by BLM.
Although the statute authorizes development of regulations for certain pipelines
for public safety purposes, the regulatory requirement focus on design and
operation and do not provide for ground-water monitoring.
Although the statute authorizes development of regulations for transportation for
public safety purposes, the regulatory requirement focus on design and
operation and do not provide for ground-water monitoring.
The statute does not authorize development of regulations for sources.
To obtain background water quality data
and to evaluate whether ground water
is being contaminated.
To confirm geotechnical and design parameters
and to ensure that the design of the
geologic repository accommodates actual field
conditions.
To evaluate whether ground water is being
contaminated.
To characterize a contamination problem and to
select and evaluate the effectiveness of corrective
measures,
To characterize a contamination problem (e g., to
assess the impacts of the situation, to identify or
verify the source(s), and to select and evaluate the
effectiveness of corrective measures).
To characterize a contamination problem,
To obtain background water-quality data.
(Continued)
-------
Table 32. Volume of Water in Casing or Borehole (Driscoll, 1986)
Diameter Gallons Cubic Feet
of Casing per foot per Foot
or Hole of Depth of Depth
(In)
Liters Cubic Meters
per Meter per Meter
of Depth of Depth
1
1 1/2
2
21/2
3
31/2
4
41/2
5
51/2
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
0.041
0.092
0.163
0.255
0.387
0.500
0.653
0.826
1.020
1.234
1.469
2.000
2.611
3.305
4.080
4.937
5.875
8.000
10.44
13.22
16.32
19.75
23.50
27.58
32.00
36.72
41.78
47.16
52.88
0.0055
0.0123
0.0218
0.0341
0.0491
0.0668
0.0873
0.1104
0.1364
0.1650
0.1963
0.2673
0.3491
0.4418
0.5454
0.6600
0.7854
1.069
1.396
1.767
2.182
2.640
3.142
3.667
4.276
4.809
5.585
6.305
7.069
0.509
1.142
2.024
3.167
4.558
6.209
8.110
10.26
12.67
15.33
18.24
24.84
32.43
41.04
50.67
61.31
72.96
99.35
128.65
164.18
202.68
245.28
291.85
342.52
397.47
456.02
518.87
585.68
656.72
0.509 x10J
1.142x10J
2.024 x 10J
3.167 x 10s
4.558 x 10s
6.209 x10^
8.110x10J
10.26 x10J
12.67x10J
15.33 X103
18.24 x 10J
24.84 x 10J
32.43 x10J
41.04x10J
50.67 x10J
61.31 x 10J
72.96 x 10s
99.35 x 10J
129.65 x10^
164.18 x 10s
202.68 x10J
245.28 x10J
291 . 85 x 10s
342.52 x10J
397.41 x 10J
456.02 x10J
518.87 x10J
585.68 x10J
656.72 x 10J
1 Gallon = .785 Liters
1 Meter = 3.281 Feet
1 Gallon Water Weighs 8.33 Ibs. = 3.785 Kilograms
1 Liter Water Weighs 1 Kilogram = 2.205 Ibs.
1 Gallon per foot of depth = 12.419 liters per foot of depth
1 Gallon per meter of depth = 12.419 x 10J cubic meters
per meter of depth
cost. For an additional discussion of casing diameter, refer to
the sections entitled "Equipment that the Well Must Accommo-
date" and "Description and Selection of Drilling Methods."
Casing Cleaning Requirements
During the production of any casing material, chemical
substances are used to assist in the extrusion, molding, machin-
ing and/or stabilization of the casing material. For example, oils
and solvents aee used in many phases of steel casing production.
In the manufacturing of PVC well casing, a wax layer can
develop on the inner wall of the casing additionally, protective
coatings of natural or synthetic waxes, fatty acids or fatty acid
esters may be added to enhance the durability of the casing
(Barcelona et al, 1983). These substances are potential sources
of chemical interference and therefore must be removed prior
to installation of the casing in the borehole. If trace amounts of
these materials still adhere to the casing after installation, the
chemical integrity of samples taken from the monitoring well
can be affected.
Careful pre-installation cleaning of casing materials must
reconducted to avoid potential chemical interference problems
from the presence of substances such as cutting oils, cleaning
solvents, lubricants, threading compounds, waxes and/or other
chemical residues. For PVC, Curran and Tomson (1983) sug-
gest washing the casing with a strong detergent solution and
then rinsing with water before installation. Barcelona et al.
(1983) and Barcelona (1984) suggest this same procedure for
all casing materials. To accomplish the removal of some cutting
oils, lubricants or solvents, it may be necessary to steam-clean
casing materials or employ a high-pressure hot water wash.
Casing materials must also be protected from contamination
while they are on-site awaiting installation in the borehole. This
can be accomplished by providing a clean storage area away
from any potential contaminant sources (air, wafer or soil) or by
using plastic sheeting spread on the ground for temporary
storage adjacent to the work area. An additional discussion on
decontamination of equipment can be found in the section
entitled, "Decontamination. "
Casing Cost
As Scalf et al. (1981) point out, the dilemma for the field
investigator often is the relationship between cost and accuracy.
The relative cost of PVC is approximately one tenth the cost of
fluoropolymer materials. Cost is always a consideration for any
ground-water monitoring project and becomes increasingly
important as the number and/or depth of the wells increases.
However, if the particular components of interest in a monitoring
program are also components of the casing, then the results that
are potentially attributable to the casing will be suspect. If the
contaminants to be determined are already defined and they do
not include chemical constituents that could potentially leach
from or sorb onto PVC well casing (as defined by laboratory
studies), it may be possible to use PVC as a less expensive
alternative to other materials.
Monitoring Well Intakes
Proper design of a hydraulically efficient monitoring well
in unconsolidated geologic materials and in certain types of
poorly-consolidated geologic materials requires that a well
intake be placed opposite the zone to be monitored. The intake
should be surrounded by materials that are coarser have a
uniform grain size; and have a higher permeability than natural
formation material. This allows ground water to flow freely into
the well from the adjacent formation material while minimizing
or eliminating the entrance of fine-grained materials (clay, silt,
fine sand) into the well. When the well is properly designed and
developed, the well can provide ground-water samples that are
free of suspended solids. Sediment-free water reduces the
potential for interference in sample analyses and eliminates or
reduces the need for field sample filtration.
These purposes can be accomplished by designing the well
in such a way that either the natural coarse-grained formation
materials or artificially introduced coarse-grained materials, in
conjunction with appropriately sized intake (well semen) open-
ings, retain the fine materials outside the well while permitting
water to enter (United States Environmental Protection Agency.
1975). Thus, there are two types of wells and well intake designs
for wells installed in unconsolidated or poorly-consolidated
geologic materials naturally developed wells and wells with an
artificially introduced filter pack. In both types of wells, the
objective of a filter pack is to increase the effective diameter of
the well and to surround the well intake with an envelope of
relatively coarse material of greater permeability than the
natural formation materiaL
-------
Schedule 5
(Stainless Steel)
Schedule 10
(Stainless Steel)
Schedule 40
(Stainless Steel, PVC,
Fluorooplymer}
Schedule 60
(PVC, Fluoropolymer)
Wall Thickness (Inches)
Nominal 2
Nominal 3
Nominal 4
Nominal 5
Nominal 6
Inside Diameter
Nominal 2
Nominal 3
Nominal 4
Nominal 5
Nominal 6
Sch 5
0.066
0.063
0.083
0.109
0.109
Sch 5
2.245
3.334
4.334
5.345
6.407
Sch 10
0.109
0.120
0.120
0.134
0.134
Sch 10
2.157
3.260
4.260
5.285
6.357
Sch 40
0.164
0.216
0.237
0.258
0.280
Sch 40
2.067
3.068
4.026
5.047
6.065
Sch 80
0.218
0.300
0.337
0.375
0.432
Sch 80
1.939
2.900
3.826
4.813
5.761
Outside Diameter
(Standard)
2.375
3.500
4,500
5.563
6.625
Figure 53. Effect of casing wall thickness on casing Inside and outside diameter.
In the construction of a monitoring well it is imperative that
the natural stratigraphic setting be distorted as little as possible.
This requires that the development of void space be minimized
in unconsolidated formations. As a consequence, boreholes that
are over-sized with regard to the casing and well intake diam-
eter generally should be filter-packed. For example, where 2-
inch diameter screens are installed in hollow-stem auger bore-
holes an artificial filter pack is generally recommended. This
prevents the collapse of the borehole around the screen with the
subsequent creation of void space and the loss of stratification
of the formation. Collapse also frequently results in the failure
of well seals emplaced on top of the collapsed zone, although
well development prior to seal installation may help to minimize
this potential problem.
Naturally-Developed Wells
In a naturally-developed well, formation materials are
allowed to collapse around the well intake after it has been
installed in the borehole. The high-permeability envelope of
coarse materials is developed adjacent to the well intake in situ
by removing the fine-grained materials from natural formation
materials during the well development process.
As described in Driscoll (1986), the envelope of coarse-
grained, graded material created around a well intake during the
development process can be visualized as a series of cylindrical
zones. In the zone adjacent to the well screen, development
removes particles smaller than the screen openings leaving
only the coarser material in place. Slightly farther away, some
medium-sized grains remain mixed with coarse materials.
Beyond that zone, the material gradually grades back to the
original character of the water-bearing formation. By creating
this succession of graded zones around the screen, development
stabilizes the formation so that no further movement of fine-
grained materials will take place and the well will yield sedi-
ment-free water at maximum capacity (Figure 54).
The decision on whether or not a well can be naturally
developed is generally based on geologic conditions, specifi-
cally the grain-size distribution of natural formation materials
in the monitored zone. Wells can generally be naturally devel-
oped where formation materials are relatively coarse-grained
and permeable. Grain-size distribution is determined by con-
ducting a sieve analysis of a sample or samples taken from the
intended screened interval. For this reason, the importance of
obtaining accurate formation samples cannot be overempha-
sized.
After the sample(s) of formation material is sieved, a plot
of grain size versus cumulative percentage of sample retained
on each sieve is made (Figure 55). Well intake opening sizes are
then selected, based on this grain size distribution and specifically
on the effective size and uniform it y coefficient of the formation
materials. The effective size is equivalent to the sieve size that
retains 90 percent (or passes 10 percent) of the formation
material (Figure 56); the uniformity coefficient is the ratio of
the sieve size that will retain 40 percent (or pass 60 percent) of
the formation material to the effective size (Figure 57). A
naturally-developed well can be considered if the effective
grain size of the formation material is greater than 0.01 inch and
the uniformity coefficient is appropriate.
87
-------
Zone of
Coarsest
Natural
Material
Zone of
Medium-sized
Granular
Material
Original
Material of
Water-
bearing
Formation
Figure 54. Envelope of coarse-grained material crested around a naturally developed well,
In monitoring well applications, naturally-developed wells
can be used where the maximum borehole diameter closely
approximates the outside diameter of the well intake. By
maintaining a minimum space between the well casing and the
borehole face, the disturbance of natural stratigraphic condi-
tions is minimized. If these conditions are not observed, the
radius of disturbance reduce-s the probability y that ambient flow
conditions can be restored.
Artificially Filter-Packed Wells
When the natural formation materials surrounding the well
intake are deliberately replaced by coarser, graded material
introduced from the surface, the well is artificial y filter packed.
The term "grovel pack" is also frequently used to describe the
artificial material added to the borehole to act as a filter.
Because the term "gravel" is classically used to describe large-
diameter granular material and because nearly all coarse mate-
rial emplaced artificially in wells is an engineered blend of
coarse to medium sand-sized material, the-use of the terms
"sand pack" or "filter pack" is preferred in this document.
Gravel-sized particles are rarely used as filter pack material
because gravel does not generally serve the intended function
of a filter pack in a monitoring well.
The artificial introduction of coarse, graded material into
the annular space between a centrally-positioned well intake
and the borehole serves a variety of purposes. Similar to
naturally-developed filter pack, the primary purpose of an
artificial filter pack is to work in conjunction with the well
intake to filter out fine materials from the formation adjacent to
the well. In addition, the artificial filter pack stabilizes the
borehole and minimizes settlement of materials above the well
intake. The introduction of material coarser than the natural
formation materials also results in an increase in the effective
-------
o
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
N
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
^
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
Slot Opening and Grain Size, Thousandths of an Inch
Figure 55. Plot of grain size versus cumulative percentage of
sample retained on slew.
diameter of the well and in an accompanying increase in the
amount of water that flows toward and into the well (Figure 58).
There are several geologic situations where the use of an
artificial filter pack material is recommended:
1) when the natural formation is uniformly fine-
grained (i.e., fine sand through clay-sized
particles);
2) when a long screened interval is required rind/or
the intake spans highly stratified geologic materials
of widely varying grain sizes;
3) when the formation in which the intake will be
placed is a poorly cemented (friable) sandstone;
4) when the formation is a fractured or solution-
channeled rock in which particulate matter is
carried through fractures or solution openings;
5) when the formation is shales or coals that will act
as a constant supply of turbidity to any ground-
water samples; and
6) when the diameter of the borehole is significantly
greater than the diameter of the screen.
The use of an artificial filter pack in a fine-grained geologic
material allows the intake opening (slot) size to be considerably
larger than if the intake were placed in the formation material
without the filter pack. This is particularly true where silts and
clays predominate in the zone of interest and where fine
opening sizes in well intakes to hold out formation materials are
either impractical or not commercially available. The larger
intake opening size afforded by artificial filter pack emplace-
ment thus allows for the collection of adequate volumes of
sediment-free samples and results in both decreased head loss
and increased well efficiency.
Filter packs are particularly well-suited for use in exten-
sively stratified formations where thin layers of fine-grained
materials alternate with coarser materials. In such a geologic
environment, it is often difficult to precisely determine the
position and thickness of each individual stratum and to choose
the correct position and opening size for a well intake. Complet-
ing the well with an artificial filter pack, sized and graded to suit
the freest layer of a stratified sequence, resolves the latter
problem and increases the possibility that the well will produce
water free of suspended sediment.
Quantitative criteria exist with which decisions can be
made concerning whether a natural or an artificial filter pack
should be used in a well (Campbell and Lehr, 1973; United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975; Willis, 1981;
Driscoll, 1986). Generally the use of an artificial filter pack is
recommended where the effective grain size of the natural
formation materials is smaller than 0.010 inch and the unifor-
mity coefficient is less than 3.0. California Department of
Health Services (1986) takes a different approach and suggests
that an artificial filter pack be employed if a sieve analysis of
formation materials indicates that a slot size of 0.020 inches or
less is required to retain 50 percent of the natural material.
Economic considerations may also affect decisions con-
cerning the appropriateness of an artificial filter pack. Costs
associated with filter-packed wells are generally higher than
those associated with naturally developed wells, primarily
because specially graded and washed sand must be purchased
and transported to the site. Additionally, larger boreholes are
necessary for artificially filter-packed wells (e.g., suggested
minimum 6-inch diameter borehole for a 2-inch inside diameter
well or 8-inch borehole for a 4-inch well).
An alternate design for the artificial filter pack is provided
by the "pre-packed" well intake. There are two basic designs
that are commercially available: 1) single-wall prepack and 2)
double-wall prepack. The single-wall prepack is fabricated by
bonding well-sorted siliceous grains onto a perforated pipe
base. Epoxy-based bonds have been the most commonly used,
although other types of bonding materials have also been
employed. The double-wall prepack consists of an unbonded
granular layer of well-sorted silica grains between two perfo-
rated casings. The advantage of the double-wall system is that
it is extremely strong and should not have chemical questions
from bonding agent used in single wall.
The advantages of prepack well intakes are: 1) ease of
installation in either a stable borehole or within boreholes
protected by auger flights or casing (by the pullback method)
and 2) the ability if properly sized to provide filtrat.ion of even
the finest formations, thereby effectively minimizing turbidity
in otherwise "difficult if not impossible to develop formations."
The disadvantages of this type of well intake are 1) the bonding
material for the single-wall design may create chemical inter-
ference; 2) wells with prepack screens are difficult to redevelop
if plugging occurs; and 3) commercial availability of this design
has been extremely variable through time. The single-wall
epoxy-based well intake is presently available only on an
import bases the double-wall well intake is currently available
from at least one domestic manufacturer.
89
-------
100,
90
80
7C
6C
S 50
I
§ 4C
|(X
U. S. Standard Sieve Numbers
i 16 12
o
30
20
10
The Effective Size of This Sand is
0,018-inch
1100
30
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2( 30 40 >0 60
Slot Opening and Grain Size, in Thousandths of an Inch
Figure 56. Determining effective size of formation materials.
Filter Pack Design —
Artificial filter pack design factors for monitoring wells
include: 1) filter pack grain size; 2) intake opening (slot) size
and length; 3) filter pack length, 4) filter pack thickness and 5)
filter pack material type. When an artificial filter pack is
dictated by sieve analysis or by geologic conditions, the filter
pack grain sizes and well intake opening sizes are generally
designed as a single unit,
The selection of filter pack grain size and well intake
opening size is a function of the formation. The filter pack is
designed first because it is the interface with the aquifer. The
first step in designing the filter pack is to obtain samples of the
formation intended to be monitored and perform sieve analyses
on the samples. The filter pack material size is then selected on
the basis of the finest formation materials present.
Although design techniques vary, all use the filter pack
ratio to establish size differential between the formation mate-
rials and filter pack materials. Generally this ratio refers to
either the average (50 percent retained) grain size of the forma-
tion material or the 70 percent retained size of the formation
material. For example, Walker (1974) and Barcelona et al.
(1985a) recommend using a uniform filter pack grain size that
is 3 to 5 times the 50 persent retained size of the formation
materials. Driscoll (1986) recommends a more conservative
approach by suggesting that for fine-grained formations, the 50
percent retained size of the finest formation sample be multi-
plied by a factor of 2 to exclude the entrance of fine silts, sands
and clays into the monitoring well. The United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency (1975) recommends that filter pack
grain size be selected by multiplying the 70 percent retained
grain size of the formation materials by a factor between 4 and
6. A factor of 4 is used if the formation is fine and uniform; a
factor of 6 is used if the formation is coarser and non-uniform.
In both cases, the uniformity coefficient of the filter pack
materials should not exceed 2.5 and the gradation of the filter
material should form a smooth and gradual size distribution
90
-------
U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers
&
1
o
I
1
JS
o
100
90
80
70
60
5C
4C
3C
2C
1C
\
The Uniformity CoefficientfofHIHis
Sand Is:
0.026-Inch
0.010-Inch
. = 2.6
too
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Slot Opening and Grain Size, in Thousandths of an Inch
110
120
130
Figure 57. Determining uniformity coefficient of formation matarials.
Formation Materia
Filter Pack
Material
* • ' *' *
* ** • . *
* .'. • *•
* " • * '
4 - *
. L
• ; i •*
Borehole
Figure 58. Envelope of coarse-grained material emplaced
around an artificially flter-packed well.
when plotted (Figure 59). The actual filter pack used should fall
within the area defined by these two curves. According to
Williams (1981), in uniform formation materials, either ap-
proach to filter pack material sizing will provide similar results;
however in coarse, poorly sorted formation materials, the
average grain size method may be misleading and should be
used with discretion.
Two types of artificial filter packs are possible for use in
production wells: 1) the uniform, well-sorted grain size filter
pack and 2) the graded grain-size filter pack. Uniform filter
packs are generally preferred to graded packs for monitoring
wells. Graded packs are more susceptible to the invasion of
formation materials at the formation-filter pack interface. This
invasion results in a partial filling of voids between grains and
a concomitant reduction in permeability. Graded packs are also
difficult to install in the limited annular space available without
segregation of the filter pack material. With a uniform filter
pack, the fine formation materials can travel between the grains
of the pack and be pulled into the well during development.
When this occurs, the formation permeability is increased and
the high permeability of the filter pack is also retained.
91
-------
1
tr
c
Q_
S
1
o
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
IOC
20
U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers
16
Formation
Gradalti
Filter Pack Ratio = 4
Uniformity Coefficient = 2.Z
Uniformity Coefficient = 2.5
Filter Pack Ratio = 4 to 6
D70 = 0.014 Inch
V.
Filter Pack Ratio = 6
Uniformity Coefficient
= 2.1
100
90
90
70
60
50
40
30
20
to
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Slot Opening and Grain Size, in Thousandths of an Inch
110 120 130
Figure 59. Artificial filter pack design criteria.
The size of well intake openings can only be selected after
the filter pack grain size is specified. The opening (slot) size is
generally chosen on the basis of its ability to hold back between
85 percent and 100 percent of the filter pack materials (United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975) (Figure 60).
Filter Pack Dimensions —
The filter pack should generally extend from the bottom of
the well intake to approximately 2 to 5 feet above the top of the
well intake provided the interval above the well intake does not
result in cross-connection with an overlying zone. If cross-
connection is a potential problem, then the design may need to
be adjusted. The filter pack placed above the intake allows for
settlement of the filter pack material that occurs during well
development and allows a sufficient "buffer" between the well
intake and the annular seal above.
The filter pack must be at least thick enough to surround the
well intake completely but thin enough to minimize resistance
caused by the filter pack to the flow of water into the well during
development. To accommodate the filter pack, the well intake
should be centered in the borehole and the annulus should be
large enough and approximately symmetrical to preclude
bridging and irregular placement of filter pack material. A
thicker filter pack neither increases the yield of the well nor
reduces the amount of fine material in the water flowing to the
well (Ahrens, 1957). Most references in the literature (Walker,
1974; United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975;
Williams, 198 1; Driscoll, 1986) suggest that a filter pack
thickness of between 3 and 8 inches is optimum for production
wells. A thin filter pack is preferable from the well-develop-
ment perspective, because it is difficult to develop a well with
a thick filter pack. Conversely, it is difficult to reliably construct
a well with a filter pack that is less than 2 inches thick.
Monitoring well filter pack thicknesses are commonly sug-
gested to be at least 2 to 4 inches. Methods to calculate the
volume of filter pack necessary are contained in Appendix A in
the section entitled "Installation of the Filter Pack."
92
-------
1007050 40 30 20
U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers
16 12:
100
D70 Formation « 0.014
D70 Filter Pack = 0.071
Fitter Pack Ratio = 5
Uniformily Coefficient of
Filter Pack-1.3
Recommended Screen
Slot Opening =-060 in.
(60 Slot)
1100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
Slot Opening and Grain Size, in Thousandths of an Inch
130
Figure 60. Selecting well intake slot size based on filter pack grain size.
Filter Pack Materials —
The materials comprising the filter pack in a monitoring
well should be chemically inert to alleviate the potential for
alteration of ground-water sample chemical quality. Barcelona
et al. (1985b) suggest that the filter pack materials should be
composed primarily of clean quartz sand or glass beads. The
individual grains of the filter pack materials should be well-
rounded and consist of less than 5 percent non-siliceous mate-
rial (Driscoll, 1986). For natural materials, well rounded quartz
is preferred because quartz is noneactive in nearly all ground-
water conditions and is generally available. A filter pack
comprised of other types of crushed stone should not be used
because of potential chemical alteration of ground water and
problems from non-rounded material. If crushed limestone is
used, the alterations may be particularly signifcant and pH
modifications can be expected. Shale and carbonaceous mate-
rial should also be avoided.
Well Intake Design
Monitoring well intake design factors include 1) intake
opening (slot) size, 2) intake length, 3) intake type and 4)
corrosion and chemical degradation resistance. Proper sizing of
monitoring well intake openings is one of the most important
aspects of monitoring well design. There has been in the pasta
tendency among some monitoring well designers to install a
"standard" or common slot size (e.g., 0.010 inch slots) in every
well, with no site-specific design considerations. As Williams
(1981) points out, this can lead to difficulties with well devel-
opment, poor well performance or, in some severe cases, well
failure.
Well Intake Opening Sizes —
For artificially filter packed wells, the well intake opening
sizes are selected as previously discussed and illustrated in
Figure 60. For naturally packed wells, well intake opening sizes
are generally selected based on the following criteria that were
developed primarily for production wells:
1) where the uniformity coefficient of the formation
material is greater than 6 and the material above
the intended screened interval is non-caving, the
slot size should be that which retains no less than
30 percent of formation material;
2) where the uniformity coefficient of the formation
material is greater than 6 and the material above
the intended screened interval is readily-caving,
the slot size should be that which retains no less
than 50 percent of formation material;
3) where the uniformity coefficient of the formation
93
-------
material is less than 3 and the material above the
intended screened interval is non-caving, the slot
size should be that which retains no less than 40
percent of formation material
4) where the uniformity coefficient of the formation
material is less than 3 and the material above the
intended screened interval is readily-caving, the
slot size should be that which retains no less than
60 percent of formation material; and
5) where an interval to be monitored has layered
formation material of differing sizes and
gradations, and where the 50 percent grain size of
the coarsest layer is less than 4 times the 50
percent size of the finest layer, the slot size should
be selected on the basis of the finest layer.
Otherwise, separate screened sections should be
sized for each zone.
Because these criteria were developed for production wells,
those factors that enhance yield are overemphasized. The
objective of a monitoring well is frequently to obtain a water
quality sample that is representative of the in-situ ground-water
quality. Hence it is imperative to minimize disturbance or
distortion of flow lines from the aquifer into the well. To
achieve this objective, construction activities that result in
caving, void space or modification of the stratigraphy in the
vicinity of the wellbore must be avoided or minimized, Proce-
dures for attaining this objective have been discussed in this
chapter in the section entitled "Naturally-Developed Wells"
and in Section 4 in the part entitled "Ability of Drilling Tech-
nology to Preserve Natural Conditions."
The slot size determined from a sieve analysis is seldom
that of commercially available screen slot sizes (Table 33), so
the nearest smaller standard slot size is generally used. In most
monitoring wells, because optimum yield from the well is not
as critical to achieve as it is in production wells and because
extensive development is more difficult to accomplish in small-
diameter monitoring wells, screens are usually designed to have
smaller openings than indicated by the above-stated design
criteria so that less formation material will be pulled into the
well during the development.
Well Intake Length Selection —
The selection of the length of a monitoring well intake
depends on the purpose of the well. Most monitoring wells
function as both ground-water sampling points and piezometers
for a discrete interval. To accomplish these objectives, well
intakes are typically 2 to 10 feet in length, and only rarely equal
or exceed 20 feet in length. Shorter intakes provide more spe-
cific information about vertically-distributed water quality,
hydraulic head and flow in the monitored formation. However,
if the objective of the well' is to monitor for the gross presence
of contaminants in an aquifer, a much longer screen can be
selected to monitor a greater thickness of the aquifer. This type
of well can provide an integrated water sample and an inte-
grated hydraulic head measurement as well as access for
vertical profiling.
There are also situations where the "flow-through"-type
well is preferable. In a flow-through installation, a small-
diameter semen of 2 inches diameter or less, is installed to fully
penetrate an aquifer, or to at least penetrate a significant portion
of the aquifer. The diameter of the screen is small so that
minimal distortion of the flow field in the aquifer is created.
Borehole geochemical profiling is used to evaluate vertical
variations in contaminant flow; spot sampling can be used to
provide zone characterization with minimal vertical mixing. By
slowly lowering a geochemical probe into the borehole, mea-
surements of parameters such as pH, Eh, conductivity, dis-
solved oxygen and temperate can be taken at close intervals
(e.g. 1-foot, 2-foot or 5-foot intervals). These measurements
can be recorded successively from the top of the saturated zone
to the bottom of the screened interval with very slight disturbance
to the zone being measured. Measurements are taken as the
probe is lowered because vertical mixing in the borehole can be
expected to occur as the probe is withdrawn.
Once sufficient time has passed after sampling for indig-
enous conditions to be reestablished, a grab sampler can be
lowered to the uppermost zone of interest and a water quality
sample obtained. By slowly and carefully sampling successively
deeper zones, a series of relatively undisturbed water quality
samples can recollected for laboratory analysis. The laboratory
results can subsequently be compared with the data obtained
from the geochemical probe. The method of geochemical
evaluation is particularly valuable for evaluating three-dimen-
sional flow in a stratified but relatively homogeneous aquifer
such as fluvial sands and gravels.
Well Intake Type —
The hydraulic efficiency of a well intake depends primarily
on the amount of open area available per unit length of intake.
While hydraulic efficiency is of secondary concern in monitoring
wells, increased open area in monitoring well intakes also
permits easy flow of water from the formation into the well and
allows for effective well development. The amount of open area
in a well intake is controlled by the type of well intake and
opening size.
Many different types of intakes are available for use in
production wells; several of these are also suitable for use in
monitoring wells. Commercially-manufactured well intakes
are recommended for use in monitoring wells because stricter
quality control measures are followed by commercial manufac-
turers. Hand-slotted or drilled casings should not be used as
monitoring well intakes because there is poor control over the
intake opening size, lack of open area and potential leaching
and/orchemical problems at the fresh surfaces exposed by hand
sawing or drilling. Similarly, casing that has been perforated
either by the application of a casing knife or a perforating gun
after the casing is installed in the borehole is not recommended
because intake openings cannot be closely spaced, the percent-
age of open area is low, the opening sizes are highly variable and
opening sizes small enough to control fine materials are diffi-
cult or impossible to produce. Additionally, perforation tends to
hasten corrosion attack on metal casing because the jagged
edges and rough surfaces of the perforations are susceptible to
selective corrosion.
Many commercially-manufactured well intakes have been
used in monitoring wells including: 1) the louvered (shutter-
type) intake, 2) the bridge-slot intake, 3) the machine-slotted
well casing and 4) the continuous-slot wire-wound intake
(Figure 61). The latter two types of intakes are used most
94
-------
Table 33. Correlation Chart of Screen Openings and Sieve Sizes (Driscoll, 1986)
Geologic
Material
Grain-size
Range
Johnson
slot
No.
Gauze
No.
Sieve
No.
Tyler
Size of Openings
Inches mm
Sieve
No.
Openings
Inches
clay
&
silt
fine
sand
medium
sand
coarse
sand
very
coarse
sand
very
fine
gravel
fine
gravel
6
7
8
10
12
14
16
20
23
25
28
31
33
35
39
47
56
62
66
79
93
94
111
125
132
157
187
223
250
263
312
375
438
500
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
400
325
270
250
200
170
150
115
100
80
65
60
48
42
35
32
28
24
20
16
14
12
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
31/2
3
21/2
0.371
0.441
0.525
0,0015
0.0017
0.0021
0.0024
0.0029
0.0035
0.0041
0.0049
0.0058
00069
00082
0.0097
0,0116
0.0138
0.0164
0.0180
0.0195
0.0232
00250
0.0276
0.0310
0.0328
0.035
0,039
0.046
0.055
0.062
0.065
0.078
0.093
0.094
0.110
0.125
0.131
0.156
0.185
0.221
0.250
0.263
0.312
0.371
0.441
0.525
0.038
0043
0.053
0.081
0.074
0.088
0.104
0.124
0.147
0,175
0.208
0.246
0.295
0.351
0.417
0.457
0.495
0589
0.635
0.701
0,788
0.833
0,889
0.991
1.168
1.397
1.590
1.651
1.981
2.362
2.390
2.794
3.180
3.327
3962
4.699
5.613
6.350
6.880
7.925
9.423
11.20
13.33
400
325
270
230
200
170
140
120
100
80
70
60
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
7
6
5
4
31/2
114
5/16
3/8
7/16
1/2
00015
0.0017
0.0021
0.0024
0.0029
0.0035
0.0041
0.0049
0.0059
0.0070
0.0063
0.0098
0.0117
0.0138
0.0165(1/64)
0.0180
0.0197
0.0232
0.0250
0.0280
0.0310(1/32)
0.0331
0.0350
0.0394
0.0469
0,0555
0.062(1/16)
0.0861
0.0787
0.0931
0.094(3/32)
0.111
0.125(1/8)
0.132
0.157
0.187(3/16)
0.223
0.250(1/4)
0.283
0.31 2(5/1 6)
0.375(3/8)
0.438(7/16)
0.500(1/2)
extensively because they are the only types available with 2-
inch inside diameters,
'The lowered, (shutter-type) screen has openings that are
manufactured in solid-wall metal tubing by stamping outward
with a punch against dies that limit the size of the openings
(Helweg et al, 1984). The number and sizes of openings that
can be made depends on the series of die sets used by individual
manufacturers. Because a complete range of die sets is imprac-
tical, the opening sizes of commercially-available screens are
somewhat limited. Additionally, because of the large blank
spaces that must be left between adjacent openings, the percent-
age of open area on louvered intakes is limited. Louvered well
intakes are primarily used in artificially-packed wells because
the shape of the louvered openings is such that the shutter-type
intakes are more difficult to develop in naturally-packed wells.
This type of intake, however, provides greater collapse strength
than most other intakes.
Bridge-slot screen is manufactured on a press from flat
sheets or plates of metallic material that are rolled into cylinders
and seam-welded after being perforated. The slot opening is
usually vertical with two parallel openings longitudinally aligned
to the well axis. Five-foot sections of bridge-slot screen that can
be welded into longer screen sections if desired are commonly
available. The advantages of bridge-slot screen include: a
reasonably high intake opening area, minimal frictional head
losses and low cost. One important disadvantage is low collapse
strength that is caused by the presence of a large number of
vertically-oriented slots. The use of this type of intake is limited
95
-------
in monitoring well application because it is only produced in
diameters 6 inches and larger.
Slotted well intakes are fabricated from standard well
casing by cutting horizontal (circumferential) or vertical (axial)
slots of predetermined widths at regular intervals with machin-
ing tools. Slotted well casing can be manufactured from any
casing material although these intakes are most commonly
made from thermoplastic, fluoropolymer and fiberglass-rein-
forced epoxy materials. This type of intake is available in
diameters ranging from 3/4 inch to 16 inches (National Water
Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 198 1). Table 34
lists the most common slot widths of slotted well casing.
Table 34. Typical Slotted Casing Slot Widths (National Water
Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute, 1981)
0.006
0.007
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
0.040
0.050
0.060
0.070
0.060
0.100
The continuous slot wire-wound intake is manufactured by
winding cold-drawn wire, approximately triangular in cross
section, spirally around a circular array of longitudinally ar-
ranged rods (Figure 62). At each point where the wire crosses
the rods, the two members are securely joined by welding,
creating a one-piece rigid unit (Driscoll, 1986) Continuous-slot
intakes can be fabricated of 1) any metal that can be resistance-
welded, including bronze, silicon red brass, stainless steel (104
and 316), galvanized and low-carbon steel and 2) any thermo-
plastic that can be sonic-welded, including polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) and Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS).
The slot openings of continuous-slot intakes are produced
by spacing the successive turns of the wire as desired. This
configuration provides significantly greater open area per given
length and diameter than is available with any other intake type.
For example, for 2-inch inside diameter well intake, the open
area ranges from approximately 4 percent for the smallest slot
size (0.006 inch) to more than 26 percent for the largest slot size
(0.050 inch) (Table 35). Continuous-slot intakes also provide a
wider range of available slot sizes than any other type of intake
and have slot sizes that are accurate to within +0.003 inch
(Ahrens, 1970). The slot openings are designated by numbers
that correspond to the width of the opening in thousandths of
an inch. A number 10 slot, for example, refers to an opening of
0.010 inch.
The continuous-slot intake also is more effective in pre-
venting formation materials from becoming clogged in the
openings. The triangular-shaped wire is wound so that the slot
openings between adjacent wires are V-shaped, with sharp
outer edges the slots are narrowest at the outer face and widen
inwardly. This makes the intakes non-clogging because par-
ticles slightly smaller than the openings can pass freely into the
well without wedging in the opening.
Well Intake Material Properties —
The intake is the part of the monitoring well that is most
susceptible to corrosion and/or chemical degradation and pro-
vides the highest potential for sorption or leaching phenomena
to occur. Intakes have a larger surface area of exposed material
than casing, are placed in a position designed to be in contact
with potential contaminants (the saturated zone) and are placed
in an environment where reactive materials are constantly being
renewed by flowing water. To avoid corrosion, chemical deg-
radation, sorption and leaching problems, the materials from
which intakes are made are selected using the same guidelines
as for casing materials.
Annular Seals
Purpose of the Annular Seal
Any annular space that is produced as the result of the
installation of well casing in a borehole provides a channel for
vertical movement of water and/or contaminants unless the
space is sealed. In any casing/borehole system, there are several
potential pathways for water and contaminants (Figure 63).
One pathway is through the sealing material. If the material is
not properly formulated and installed or if it cracks or deterio-
Table 35. Intake Areas (Square Inches per Lineal Foot of Screen) for Continuous Wire-Wound Well Intake (After Johnson Screens,
Inc., 1988)
Screen 6 Slot 8 Slot 10 Slot 12 Slot 15 Slot 20 Slot 25 Slot 30 slot 35 slot 40 slot 50 slot
Size (In.) (0.006") (0.008") (0.010") (0.012") (0.015'") (0.020") (0.025") (0.030") (0.036") (0.040") (0.050")
1114 PS*
2 PS
1 1/2 PS
2 PS
3 PS
4 PS
4 Spec**
4112 PS
5 PS
6 PS
8 PS
3.0
3.0
3.4
4.3
5.4
7.0
7.4
7.1
8.1
8.1
13.4
3.4
3.4
4.5
5.5
7.1
9.0
9.7
9.4
10.6
10.6
17.6
4.8
4.8
5.5
6.8
8.8
11.3
11.9
11.7
13.1
13.2
21.7
6.0
6.0
6.5
8.1
10.4
13.5
14.2
13.8
15.5
15.6
25.7
7.0
7.0
8.1
10.0
12.8
16.5
17.2
17.0
19.1
19.2
31.5
8.9
8.9
10.2
12.8
16.5
21.2
22.2
21.9
24,7
25.0
40,6
10.8
10.8
12.3
15.4
20.0
25.8
27,1
26.8
30.0
30.5
49.3
12.5
12.5
14.2
17.9
23.2
30.0
31.3
31.0
34.9
35.8
57.4
14,1
14.1
16.2
20.3
26.5
33.9
35.5
35.2
39.7
40.7
65.0
15.6
15.6
17.9
22.4
29.3
37.7
39,7
39.4
44.2
45.4
72.3
18.4
18.4
20.1
26.3
34.7
44.5
46.8
46.5
52.4
54.3
85.6
The maximum transmitting capacity of screens can be derived from these figures. To determine GPM per ft of screen, multiply the intake area
in square inches by 0.31. It must be remembered that this is the maximum capacity of the screen under ideal conditions with an entrance
velocity of 0.1 foot per second.
* PS means pip size.
** Spec means special.
96
-------
U ll U ll U |l U
Bridge Slot Screen
Shutter-type Screen
Slotted Casing
Continuous Slot
Wire-wound Screen
Figure 61. Types of well intakes.
t>
t>
D>
N
Vertical Cross-section
Horizontal Cross-section
Figure 62. Cross-sections of continuous-wrap wire-wound
screen
rates after emplacement, the permeability in the vertical direc-
tion can be significant. These pathways can occur because of
any of several reason&including: 1) temperature changes of the
casing and sealing material (principally neat cement) during the
curing or setting of the sealing material, 2) swelling and
shrinkage of the sealing material while curing or setting or 3)
poor bonding between the sealing material and the casing (Kurt
and Johnson, 1982). Another pathway may result if sealing
materials bridge in the annular space. All of these pathways can
be anticipated and usually avoided with proper annular seal
formulation and placement methods.
The annular seal in a monitoring well is placed above the
filter pack in the annulus between the borehole and the well
casing. The seal serves several purposes: 1) to provide protec-
tion against infiltration of surface water and potential contami-
nants from the ground surface down the casing/borehole annu-
lus, 2) to seal off discrete sampling zones, both hydraulically
and chemically and 3) to prohibit vertical migration of water.
Such vertical movement can cause what is referred to as "cross
contamination." Cross contamination can influence the repre-
sentativeness of ground-water samples and can cause an
anomalous hydraulic response of the monitored zone, resulting
in distorted data. The annular seal increases the life of the casing
by protecting it against exterior corrosion or chemical degrada-
tion. A satisfactory annular seal results in complete filling of the
annular space and envelopes the entire length of the well casing
to ensure that no vertical migration can occur within the
borehole. Methods to calculate the volume of sealant necessary
to fill the annular space are contained in Appendix A in the
section entitled "Installation of the Filter Pack." Volume calcu-
lations are the same as those performed to calculate filter pack
volume.
Materials Used for Annular Seals
According to Moehrl (1964), the material used for an
annular seal must:
1) be capable of emplacement from the surface
2) hydrate or develop sufficient set strength within a
reasonably short time;
3) provide a positive seal between the casing and the
adjacent formations;
4) be chemically inert to formations or fluids with
which it may come in contact;
97
-------
a) Between Casing and
Seal Material
b) Through Seal Material
c) By Bridging
Figure 63. Potential pathways for fluid movement in the casing-borehole annulus.
5) be permanent, stable and resist chemical or
physical deterioration; and
6) be sufficiently impermeable to fluids to ensure
that the vertical permeability of the casing/
borehole system be lower than that of surrounding
formations.
The annular seal may be comprised of several different
types of permanent, stable, low-permeability materials includ-
ing pelletized, granular or powdered bentonite, neat cement
grout and combinations of both. The most effective seals are
obtained by using expanding materials that will not shrink away
from either the casing or the borehole wall after curing or
setting. Bentonite, expanding neat cement or mixtures of neat
cement and bentonite are among the most effective materials
for this purpose (Barcelona et al., 1983; 1985a). If the casing/
borehole annulus is backfilled with any other material (e.g.,
recompacted, uncontaminated drill cuttings; sand or borrow
material), a low permeability seal cannot be ensured and the
borehole may then act as a conduit for vertical migration. This
is particularly a problem when drill cuttings are used as a seal
because recompacted drill cuttings usually have a higher per-
meability than the natural formation materials from which they
are derived.
Bentonite —
Bentonite is a hydrous aluminum silicate comprised prin-
cipally of the clay mineral montmorillonite. Bentonite pos-
sesses the ability to expand significantly when hydrated; the
expansion is caused by the incorporation of water molecules
into the clay lattice. Hydrated bentonite in water typically
expands 10 to 15 times the volume of dry bentonite. Bentonite
forms an extremely dense clay mass with an in-place perme-
ability typically in the range of IxlO7 to IxlO'9 cm/sec when
hydrated. Bentonite expands sufficiently to provide a very tight
seal between the casing and the adjacent formation material,
thus making it a desirable sealant for the casing/borehole
annulus in monitoring wells.
Bentonite used for the purpose of sealing the annulus of
monitoring wells is generally one of two types: 1) sodium
bentonite or 2) calcium bentonite. Sodium bentonite is the most
widely used because of its greater expandability and availabil-
ity, Calcium bentonite may be preferable in high-calcium
environments because shrinkage resulting from long-term cal-
cium-for-sodium ion exchange is minimized. Bentonite is
available in several forms including pellets, granules and
powder. Pellets are uniformly shaped and sized by compression
of sodium montmorillonite powder. Granules are irregularly
shaped and sized particles of sodium montmorillonite. Both
pellets and granules expand at a relatively fast rate when
exposed to fresh water. The powdered form of bentonite is the
form produced by the processing plant after mining. While both
pelletized and granular bentonite maybe emplaced in dry form,
powdered bentonite is generally made into a slurry to allow
emplacement.
Bentonite slurry is generally prepared by mixing dry ben-
tonite powder into fresh water in a ratio of approximately 15
pounds of bentonite to 7 gallons of water to yield 1 cubic foot
of bentonite slurry. The bentonite and water are mixed by
moderate agitation, either manually in a large tank or with a
paddle mixer. The use of high-shear mixing equipment in-
creases the viscosity development of the slurry and can reduce
the ultimate working time by as much as 20 percent. Thick
bentonite slurries may swell quickly into non-pumpable gel
masses that cannot be emplaced. Pre-mix and/or polymer
(organic and inorganic) additives delay the wetting of the
bentonite and prevent premature hydration. Where additives
98
-------
are used, the additives should be evaluated for potential effects
on extant ground-water quality. Once the slurry is mixed, it
should remain workable for between one-half and two hours.
During this time, a positive displacement mud or grout pump
(typically a centrifugal, diaphragm, piston or moyno-type pump)
is used to emplace the seal at the desired depth.
Bentonite has a high cation exchange capacity. This high
cation exchange capacity allows the bentonite to exchange
cations that are part of the chemical structure of the bentonite
(principally Na, Al, Fe and Mn) with cations that exist in the
aqueous solution (e.g., ground water) that hydrates the bento-
nite. The bentonite may take up or release cations from or into
aqueous solution depending on 1) the chemistry of both the
bentonite and the solution and 2) the pH and redox potential of
the aqueous solution. In addition to having a high cation
exchange capacity, bentonite generally sets up with a moder-
ately high pH between 8.5 and 10.5. Thus, bentonite may have
an impact on the quality of ground water with which it comes
in contact, In particular, pH and metallic ion content may be
affected. If a bentonite seal is placed too close to the top of the
well intake, water-quality samples that are not representative of
the aquifer may be collected. The suggested practice is to place
at least 1 foot of very fine-grained sand on top of the filter pack
and to place the bentonite sealing material 2 to 3 feet above the
top of the well intake, where possible.
The effective use of bentonite pellets as a sealing material
depends on efficient hydration following emplacement. Hydra-
tion requires the presence of water of both sufficient quantity
and quality within the geologic materials penetrated by the
borehole. Generally, efficient hydration will occur only in the
saturated zone. Bentonitic materials by themselves are gener-
ally not appropriate for use in the vadose zone because suffi-
cient moisture is not available to effect hydration of the bento-
nite. Certain water-quality conditions inhibit the swelling of
bentonite. For example, bentonite mixed with water that has
either a total dissolved solids content greater than 500 parts per
million or a high chloride content may not swell to occupy the
anticipated volume and therefore may not provide an effective
seal, The degree of inhibition depends on the level of chlorides
or total dissolved solids in the water. Recent studies conducted
to determine the effects of some organic solvents and other
chemicals (i.e., xylene, acetone, acetic acid, aniline, ethylene
glycol, methanol and heptane) on hydrated clays including
bentonite have demonstrated that bentonite and other clays may
lose their effectiveness as low-permeability barrier materials in
the presence of concentrated solutions of selected chemical
substances (Anderson et al, 1982; Brown et al, 1983). These
studies have shown that the hydraulic conductivity of clays
subjected to high concentrations of organic acids, basic and
neutral polar organic compounds and neutral non-polar or-
ganic compounds may increase by several orders of magnitude
due to dessication and dehydration of the clay material. This
dessication and dehydration can provide conduits for vertical
migration within boreholes in which bentonite is used as sealing
material. Villaume (1985) points to possible attack on and loss
of integrity of bentonite seals due to dehydration and shrinkage
of the clay by hydrocarbons in the free product phase. Thus,
where these chemical conditions exist in the subsurface, bento-
nite may not perform as an effective seal and another material
may be necessary.
In summary, factors that should be considered in evaluat-
ing the use of bentonite as a sealant include:
1) position of the static water level in a given borehole
(including seasonal and other water-level
fluctuations);
2) ambient water quality (particularly with respect
to total dissolved solids conti'nt and chloride
content); and
3) types and potential concentrations of contaminants
expected to be encountered in the subsurface.
Cement —
Neat cement is a mixture of Portland cement (ASTM C-
150) and water in the proportion of 5 to 6 gallons of clean water
per bag (94 pounds or 1 cubic foot) of cement. Five general
types of Portland cement are produced: Type I, for general use;
Type II, for moderate sulfate resistance or moderate heat of
hydration; Type III, for high early strength; Type IV, for low
heat of hydration; and Type V, for high sulfate resistance
(Moehrl, 1964). Of the five types of cement, Type I is the most
widely used in ground-water related work.
Portland cement mixed with water in the above-cited
proportions creates slurry that weighs approximately 14 to 15
pounds per gallon. A typical 14 pounds per gallon neat cement
slurry has a mixed volume of approximately 1.5 cubic feet per
sack and a set volume of approximately 1.2 cubic feet volumet-
ric shrinkage is approximately 17 percent and the porosity of the
set cement approximates 54 percent (Moehrl, 1964), The set-
ting time for such a cement mixture ranges from 48 to 72 hours
depending primarily on water content. A variety of additives
may be mixed with the cement slurry to change the properties
of the cement. The more common additives and associated
effects on the cement include:
1) bentonite (2 percent to 6 percent). Bentonite
improves the workability y of the cement slurry,
reduces the shy weight and density, reduces
shrinkage as the cement sets and produces a
lower unit cost sealing material. Bentonite also
reduces the set strength of the seal, but this is
rarely a problem because the seal is seldom subject
to high stress (Ahrens, 1970);
2) calcium chloride (1 percent to 3 percent). Calcium
chloride accelerates the setting time and creates a
higher early strength; these attributes are
particularly useful in cold climates. Calcium
chloride also aids in reducing the amount of slurry
that enters into zones of coarse material;
3) gypsum (3 percent to (percent). Gypsum produces
a quick-setting, very hard cement that expands
upon setting. However, the high cost of gypsum
as an additive limits the use to special operations;
4) aluminum powder (less than 1 percent). Aluminum
produces a strong, quick-setting cement that
expands on setting and therefore provides a tighter
seal (Ahrens, 1970);
5) fly ash (10 percent to 20 percenfj.Fly ash increases
sulfate resistance and earl y compressive strength;
6) hydroxylated carboxylic acid. Hydroxylated
carboxylic acid retards setting time and improves
99
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 38
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Consolidated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches.
\ Z «/)
\ 0Q
\ il
\ 21°
\ 2^
\ si
\. ^ u_
\o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary-
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•o
o
c.
CD
2
0)
c
Q
"o
2-
CO
i2
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
§
8
NA
NA
10
.^
3
.2
Q.
CO
(/}
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
10
NA
NA
9
8
O
f
—
Q
1
ra
a>
cr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
10
NA
NA
5
^j
C
1
Q.
'5
s
0)
Q
"o
£,
!5
JO
'5
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
NA
NA
8
—
0)
o E
T3 0
II
OC T3
o> c
||
II
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
10
NA
NA
5
0
o>
O c
li
5 o
I- O
II
"C (M
Qz
11
-O S.
< a.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
c
10
NA
NA
9
>_
£
0)
CO
Q
C
I
2
to
c
o
< "o
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
NA
NA
10
c
g
ai
Q.
E
8
•5
0 |
CO Q-
CO O
L1J-5
Is
1"
CC n
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
10
NA
NA
9
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
64
77
NA
NA
65
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
- Consolidated formations, all types
1. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction,
3. Boreholes are expected to be sufficiently stable to permit open-hole completion.
4. Core sampling will improve the relative value of the mud rotary method.
6. Where dual-wall air is available it becomes an equally preferred method with air rotary, but borehole diameter is limited to
approximately 10 inches.
204
-------
grouting is done by filling the annul us from the bottom upward
and 2) that as the grout cures, it gains strength and provides
support to the casing.
Several methods can be used to minimize the heat of
hydration. Adding setting-timeretardants, such as bentonite or
diatomaceous earth, to the grout mix tends to reduce peak
temperatures. Other approaches include: adding inert materials
such as silica sand to the grout; circulating cool water inside the
casing during grout curing; and increasing the water-cement
ratio of the grout mix (Kurt, 1983). However, increasing the
water-cement ratio of the grout mix results in increased shrink-
age and decreased strength upon setting and more potential to
move beyond where expected or intended before setting.
Neat cement annular seals are subject to channeling be-
tween the casing and the seal because of temperature changes
during the curing process; swelling and shrinkage of the grout
while the mixture cures; and poor bonding between the grout
and the casing surface (Kurt and Johnson, 1982). One method
of ensuring a low-permeability grout seal in a monitoring well
is to minimize the shrinkage of the grout as it cures. Minimizing
shrinkage, lowering permeability and increasing the strength of
cured grout can be accomplished by minimizing water/cement
ratios (Kurt and Johnson, 1982). Typical vertical permeabilities
for casing/grout systems were found by Kurt and Johnson
(1982) to range from 20 to 100 x 10'5 centimeters per second.
These perrneabi 1 ities are higher than those determined for neat
cement grout only. This implies that the presence of casing is a
factor that increases the permeability of the system.
Methods for Evaluating Annular Seal Integrity
There are presently no fooproof field tests that can be
performed to determine if a proper annular seal has been
achieved. Of the most commonly used field tests for checking
seals in production wells, only one appears to provide basic
information on the integrity of an annular seal in a monitoring
well-geophysical logging. The accuracy of geophysical log-
ging techniques is often questioned because they are indirect
sensing techniques. The log most commonly used to check a
seal composed of neat cement grout is the cement bond (acous-
tic, sonic) log. A cement bond log generally indicates bonded
and non-cemented zones but cannot detect the presence of
'vertical channels within the cement nor small voids in the
contact area with the casing. Cement bond logs are available for
wells with inside diameters of 2 inches or larger.
Where thermoplastic or fluorocarbon casing is installed,
there is no sound or sonic wave return recorded along the casing
as is the case with metallic pipe. As a consequence, the
information derived is even more difficult to interpret. Further,
there are no good methods available to evaluate the effective-
ness of bentonite seals. This is an area in need of further
research.
Surface Completion and Protective Measures
Two types of surface completions are common for ground-
water monitoring wells: 1) above-ground completion and 2)
flush-to-ground surfacecompletion. An above-ground comple-
tion is preferred whenever practical, but a flush-to-ground
surface may be required at some sites. The primary purposes of
either type of completion are to prevent surface runoff from
entering and infiltrating down the annulus of the well and to
protect the well from accidental damage or vandalism.
Surface Seals
Whichever type of completion is selected for a well, there
should always be a surface seal of neat cement or concrete
surrounding the well casing and filling the annular space
between the casing and the borehole at the surface. The surface
seal may bean extension of the annular seal installed above the
filter pack or it may be a separate seal emplaced on top of the
annular seal. Because the annular space near the land surface is
large and the surface material adjacent to the borehole is
disturbed by drilling activity, the surface seal will generally
extend to at least 3 feet away from the well casing at the surface;
the seal will usually taper down to the size of the borehole within
a few feet of the surface. In climates with alternating freezing
and thawing conditions, the cement surface must extend below
the frost depth to prevent potential well damage caused by frost
heaving. A suggested design for dealing with heaving condi-
tions is shown in Figure 21, If cement is mounded around the
well to help prevent surface runoff from pending and entering
around the casing, the mound should be limited in size and slope
so that access to the well is not: impaird and to avoid frost
heave damage. In some states, well installation regulations
were initially developed for water supply wells. These stan-
dards are sometimes now applied to monitoring wells, and these
may require that the cement surface seal extend to depths of 10
feet or greater to ensure sanitary protection of the well.
Above-Ground Completions
In an above-ground completion, a protective casing is
generally installed around the well casing by placing the protec-
tive casing into the cement surface seal while it is still wet and
uncured. The protective casing discourages unauthorized entry
into the well, prevents damage by contact with vehicles and
protects PVC casing from degradation caused by direct expo-
sure to sunlight. This protective casing should be cleaned
thoroughly prior to installation to ensure that it is free of any
chemicals or coatings. The protective casing should have a
large enough inside diameter to allow easy access to the well
casing and to allow easy removal of the casing cap. The
protective casing should be fitted with a locking cap and
installed so that there is at least 1 to 2 inches clearance between
the top of the in-place inner well casing cap and the bottom of
the protective casing locking cap when in the locked position.
The protective casing should be positioned and maintained in a
plumb position. The protective casing should be anchored
below frost depth into the cement surface seal and extend at
least 18 inches above the surface of the ground.
Like the inner well casing, the outer protective casing
should be vented near the top to prevent the accumulation and
entrapment of potentially explosive gases and to allow water
levels in the well to respond naturally to barometric pressure
changes. Additiomlly, the outer protective casing should have
a drain hole installed just above the top of the cement level in
the space between the protective casing and the well casing
(Figure 21). This drain allows trapped water to drain away from
the casing. This drain is particularly critical in freezing climates
where freezing of water trapped between the inner well casing
and the outer protective casing can cause the inner casing to
buckle or fail.
101
-------
A case-hardened steel lock is generally installed on the
locking casing cap to provide well security. However, corrosion
and jamming of the locking mechanism frequently occurs as the
lock is exposed to the elements. Lubricating the locks or the
corroded locking mechanisms is not recommended because
lubricants such as graphite, petroleum-based sprays, silicone
and others may provide the potential for sample chemical
alteration. Rather, the use of some type of protective measure to
shield the lock from the elements such as a plastic covering may
prove a better alternative.
In high-traffic areas such as parking lots, or in areas where
heavy equipment maybe working, additional protection such as
the installation of three or more "bumperguards" are suggested.
Bumperguards are brightly-painted posts of wood, steel or
some other durable material set in cement and located within 3
or 4 feet from the well.
Flush-to-Ground Surface Completions
In a flush-to-ground surface completion, a protectivestruc-
ture such as a utility vault or meter box is installed around well
casing that has been cut off below grade. The protective
structure is typically set into the cement surface seal before it
has cured. This type of completion is generally used in high-
traffic areas such as streets, parking lots and service stations
where an above-ground completion would severely disrupt
traffic patterns or in areas where it is required by municipal
easements or similar restraints. Because of the potential for
surface runoff to enter the below-grade protective structure and/
or well, this type of completion must be carefully designed and
installed. For example, the bond between the cement surface
seal and the protective structure as well as the seal between the
protective structure and removable cover must be watertight.
Use of art expanding cement that bonds tightly to the protective
structure is suggested. Installation of a flexible o-ring or gasket
at the point where the cover fits over the protective structure
usually suffices to seal the protective structure. In areas where
significant amounts of runoff occur, additional safeguards to
manage drainage may be necessary to discourage entry of
surface runoff.
References
Ahrens, T.P., 1957. Well design criteria: part one; Water Well
Journal, vol. II, no. 9, pp. 13-30.
Ahrens, T.P., 1970. Basic considerations of well design: part
III; Water Well Journal, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 47-51.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1981. Standard
specification for thermoplastic water well casing pipe and
couplings made in standard dimension ratios (SDR): F-
48Q 1987 Annual Book of American Society for Testing
Materials Standards, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 1028-
1033.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1986. Standard
specification for polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic pipe,
schedules 40, 80 and 120: D1785; 1987 Annual Book of
American Society for Testing Materials Standards,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 89-101.
Anderson, D.C., K.W. Brown and J.W. Green, 1982. Effects of
organic fluids on the permeability of clay soil liners Land
Disposal of Hazardous Waste: Proceedings of the 8th
Annual Research Symposium, United States Environmental
Protection Agency Report EPA-600/9-82-002, pp. 179-191.
Barcelona, M.J., 1984. TOC determinations in ground water;
Ground Water, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 18-24.
Barcelona, M.J., O.K. George and M.R. Schock, 1988.
Comparison of water samples from PTFE, PVC and SS
monitoring wells; United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las
Vegas, EPA 6OO/X-88/091,37 pp.
Barcelona, MJ., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich and E.E. Garske,
1985a. Practical guide for ground-water sampling; Illinois
State Water Survey, SWS ContractReport 374, Champaign,
Illinois, 93 pp.
Barcelona, M J., J.P. Gibb and R. Miller, 1983. A guide to the
selection of materials for monitoring well construction and
ground-water sampling; Illinois State Water Survey, SWS
Contract Report 327, Champaign, Illinois, 78 pp.
Barcelona, M J., and J.A. Helfrich, 1986. Well construction and
purging effects on ground-water samples; Environmental
Science & Technology, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1179-1184.
Barcelona, M J., and J.A. Helfrich, 1988. Laboratory and field
studies of well-casing material effects; Proceedings of the
Ground Water Geochemistry Conference, National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 363-375.
Barcelona, Michael J., John A. Helfrich and Edward E. Garske,
198Sb. Sampling tubing effects on ground-water samples;
Analytical Chemistry, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 460-464.
Boettner, Edward A., Gwendolyn L. Ball, Zane Hollingsworth
and Rumulo Aquino, 1981. Organic and organotin
compounds leached from PVC and CPVC pipe; United
States Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-
600/1-81-062,102 pp.
Brown, K.W., J.W. Green and J.C. Thomas, 1983. The influence
of selected organic liquids on the permeability of clay
liners; Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste: Proceedings of
the 9th Annual Research Symposium, United States
Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-600/9-83-
018, pp. 114-125,
California Departmentof Health Services, 1986. The California
site mitigation decision tree manual; California Department
of Health Services, Sacramento, California, 375 pp.
Campbell, M.D. and J.H. Lehr, 1973. Water Well Technology;
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 681
pp.
Campbell, M.D. and J.H. Lehr, 1975. Well cementing; Water
Well Journal, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 39-42.
Curran, Carol M. and Mason B. Tomson, 1983. Leaching of
trace organics into water from five common plastics;
Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 68-71.
Dablow, John S. Ill, Grayson Walker and Daniel Persico,
1988. Design considerations and installation techniques
for monitoring wells cased with Teflon ® PTFE; Ground-
Water Contamination Field Methods, Collins and Johnson
editors, ASTM Publication Code Number 04-963000-38,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 199-205.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground Water and Wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Dunbar, D., H. Tuchfeld, R. Siegel and R. Sterbentz, 1985.
Ground-water quality anomalies encountered during well
construction, sampling and analysis in the environs of a
hazardous waste management facility; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 70-74.
102
-------
Gross, S., 1970. Modem plastics encyclopedia; McGraw-Hill
Book Company, New York, New York, vol. 46, 1050 pp.
Hamilton, Hugh, 1985. Selection of materials in testing and
purifying water; Ultra Pure Water, January/February 1985,
3pp.
Helweg, Otto J., Verne H. Scott and Joseph C. Scalmanini,
1984. Improving well and pump efficiency; American
Water Works Association, 158 pp.
Johnson, Roy C., Jr., Carl E. Kurt and George F. Dunham, Jr.,
1980, Well grouting and casing temperature increases;
Ground Water, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 7-13.
Johnson Screens, Inc. 1988. Johnson well screens prices and
specifications; product literature, St. Paul, Minnesota, 20
Junk,Gregor A., Harry J. Svec, Ray D. Vick and Michael J.
Avery, 1974. Contamination of water by synthetic polymer
tubes; Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 8, no.
13, pp. 1100-1106.
Kurt, C.E., 1983. Cement-based seals for thermoplastic water
well casings; Water Well Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 38-40.
Kurt, Carl E. and R.C. Johnson, Jr., 1982. Permeability of grout
seals surrounding thermoplastic well casing; Ground Water,
vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 415-419.
Lerch, W. and C.L. Ford, 1948. Long-time study of cement
performance in concrete, chapter 3- chemical and physical
tests of the cements; Journal of the American Concrete
Institute, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 745-796.
Marsh, J.M. and J.W. Lloyd, 1990, Details of hydrochemical
variations in flowing wells; Ground Water, vol. 18, no. 4,
pp. 366-373.
Miller, Gary D., 1982. Uptake and release of lead, chromium
and trace level volatile organics exposed to synthetic well
casings; Proceedings of the Second National Symposium
on Aquifer-Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring,
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 236-
245.
Moehrl, Kenneth E., 1964. Well grouting and well protection;
Journal of the American Water Works Association, vol. 56,
no. 4, pp. 423-431.
Molz, F.J. and C.E. Kurt, 1979. Grout-induced temperature rise
surrounding wells; Ground Water, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 264-
269.
Morrison, R.D., 1984. Ground-water monitoring technology,
procedures, equipment and applications; Timco
Manufacturing, Inc., Prairie Du Sac, Wisconsin, 111 pp.
Nass, L.I., 1976. Encyclopedia of PVC; vols. I and II, Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, 1249 pp.
National Sanitation Foundation, 1988. National Sanitation
Foundation Standard 14, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 65 pp.
National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute,
1981. Manual on the selection and installation of
thermoplastic water well casing; National Water Well
Association, Worthington, Ohio, 64 pp.
Norton Performance Plastics, 1985. Chemware(R) high
performance laboratory products, C- 102; product literature,
Wayne, New Jersey, 18 pp.
Parker, Louise V. and Thomas F. Jenkins, 1986. Suitability of
polyvinyl chloride well casings for monitoring munitions
in ground water Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 6,
no. 3, pp. 92-98.
Purdin, Wayne, 1980. Using nonmetallic casing for geothermal
wells; Water Well Journal, vol. 34, no. 4. pp. 90-91.
Ramsey, Robert J., James M. Montgomery and George E.
Maddox, 1982. Monitoring ground-water contamination
in Spokane County, Washington; proceedings of the Second
National Symposium on Aquifer-Restoration and Ground-
Water Monitoring, National Water Well Association,
Worthington, Ohio, pp. 198-204.
Reynolds, G,W. and Robert W. Gillham, 1985. Absorption of
halogenated organic compounds by polymer materials
commonly used in ground water monitors; Proceedings of
the Second Canadian/American Conference on
Hydrogeology, National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 125-132.
Scalf, M.R., J.F. McNabb, W.J. Dunlap, R.L. Cosby and J.
Fryberger, 1981. Manual of ground-water quality sampling
procedures, National Water Well Association,
Worthington, Ohio, 93 pp.
Sosebee,J.B.,P.C. Gciszler, D.L. Winegardner and C.R. Fisher,
1983. Contamination of ground-water samples with PVC
adhesives and PVC primer from monitor wells Proceedings
of the ASTM Second Symposium on Hazardous and
Industrial Solid Waste Testing, ASTM STP #805, R.A.
Conway and W.P. Gulledge eds., American Society for
Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 38-
50.
Tomson, M. B., S.R. Hutchms, J.M. King and C.H. Ward, 1979.
Trace organic contamination of ground water: methods for
study and preliminary results; III World Congress on
Water Resources, Mexico City, Mexico, vol. 8, pp. 3701-
3709.
Troxell, G. E., H.E. Davis and J. W. Kelly, 1968. Composition
and properties of concrete; McGraw-Hill Book Company,
New York, New York, 529 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Manual
of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Supply,
Report No. EPA-570/9-75-001, 156 pp.
United ates Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document; Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER-
99501.1, United States Environmental Protection Agency,
317pp.
Verbeck, G.J. and C.W. Foster, 1950. Long-time study of
cement performance in concrete with special reference to
heats of hydration; American Society for Testing and
Materials proceedings, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp.
1295-1262.
Villaume, James F., 1985. Investigations at sites contaminated
with dense, non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLS); Ground
Water Monitoring Review, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 60-74.
Walker, William H., 1974. Tube wells, open wells, and optimum
mound-water resource development Ground Water, vol.
12, no 1, pp. 10-15. '
Williams, Ernest B., 1981. Fundamental concepts of well
design; Ground Water, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 527-542.
103
-------
Section 6
Completion of Monitoring Wells
Introduction
Once a borehole has been completed to the desired moni-
toring depth, the monitoring well must be properly installed.
Although monitoring wells can be completed in a variety of
configurations, successful completion of any monitoring well
must incorporate the following objectives:
1) the well completion must permit specific
stratigraphic zones to be sampled with complete
confidence that the sample obtained is
representative of the in-situ water quality;
2) the well completion must permit contaminants
with differing physical properties to be sampled.
For example, if the contaminant is denser or
lighter than water and therefore sinks or floats
accordingly, the well completion must allow
collection of a representative ground-water
sample;
3) the well must be constructed to prevent cross
contamination between different zones. Cross
contamination can occur if a) the intake and/or
filter pack spans more than one hydraulic unit,
b) hydraulic communication between zones occurs
along the borehole/grout interface, the casing/
grout interface, or through voids in the seal, c)
fractures intersect the wellbore, or d) if loosely
compacted soils are adjacent to the borehole;
4) the well completion should minimize any
disturbance created during the drilling process.
For example, if the well was drilled by hollow-
stem augers, the completion techniques should
eliminate the void space created by the withdrawal
of the augers; and
5) the well completion method should be cost
effective; sample integrity, of course, is of critical
importance.
To achieve these objectives, the well intake, filter pack,
and annular seal must be installed using appropriate techniques.
The following discussion addresses these techniques.
Well Completion Techniques
Well Intake Installation
In cohesive unconsolidated material or consolidated for-
mations, well intakes are installed as an integral part of the
casing sting by lowering the entire unit into the open borehole
and placing the well intake opposite the interval to be moni-
tored. Centralizing devices are typically used to center the
casing and intake in the borehole to allow uniform installation
of the filter pack material around the well intake. I f the borehole
has been drilled by a technique that creates borehole damage, it
is necessary to develop the borehole wall. When the formation
is sufficiently stable, this development should be undertaken
prior to setting the well intake. After the filter pack has been
installed, it is very difficult to clean fractures or to remove
mudcake deposits that have been formed on the borehole wall.
If the borehole was drilled with the mud rotary technique, the
borehole should be conditioned and the wallcake removed from
the borehole wall with clean water prior to the installation of the
well intake, if possible. An additional discussion on well
development is found in Section 7, entitled "Monitoring Well
Development."
In non-cohesive, unconsolidated materials when the bore-
hole is drilled by a drill-through casing advancement method,
such as a casing hammer or a cable tool technique, the well
intake should be centered inside the casing at the end of the riser
pipe and held firmly in place as the casing is pulled back. When
the well intake is being completed as a natural pack, the outside
diameter of the well intake should be between 1 and 2 inches
smaller than the outside diameter of the casing that is being
retracted. If an artificial filter pack is installed, the outside
diameter of the well intake should be at least 3 to 5 inches
smaller than the outside diameter of the casing that is being
retracted. During artificial filter pack installation, the filter
pack material must be maintained above the lower-most level
of the casing as the casing is removed. This means that the filter
pack is being emplaced continually during the time that the
casing is being pulled back and the well intake is being exposed.
This procedure minimizes the development of excessive void
space adjacent to the well intake as the casing is pulled back.
When the casing is installed through the hollow stem of a
hollow-stem auger, an artificial filter pack generally should be
emplaced because of the disparity between the outside diameter
of the auger flights and the usual 2-inch or 4-inch outside
diameter of the casing and well intake that are being installed
within the auger flights. If the augers are withdrawn and the
formation allowed to collapse around the well intake without
installing an artificial filter pack to stabilize the borehole wall,
the materials that are adjacent to the well intake maybe loose
and poorly compacted. Excessive void space adjacent to the
well intake can provide an avenue for cross contamination or
migration of contaminants. This void or loosely-compacted
zone may also interfere with the placement of proper seals.
Loosely-compacted material is difficult to adequately de-
velop from within a small diameter borehole. The surging
methods that are available generally cannot recompact the
materials adjacent to the well intake to prevent bentonite or
cement grout from migrating downward into the screened zone.
105
-------
Additionally, where collapse is permitted, the collapsed zone
around the well intake is highly disturbed and is no longer
stratified similar to the stratification of the natural formation.
As a consequence, there will be mixing of horizontal zones, and
the possibility exists that chemical changes can be induced by
the changes in the physical environment.
Where wells are installed in unconsolidated material by the
dual-wall reverse-circulation method, the well casing and well
intake are installed through the bit. The only option for comple-
tion with this construction method is to allow the materials to
collapse around the screen. In this instance, a greater sustained
effort is suggested in well-development procedures than is
normally required.
Filter Pack Installation
Several methods of emplacing artificial filter packs in the
annular space of a monitoring well are available, including:
1) gravity (free fall), 2) tremie pipe, 3) reverse circulation, and
4) backwashing. The last two methods involve the addition of
clean water to the filter pack material during emplacement. This
addition of fluid can cause chemical alteration of the environ-
ment adjacent to the well and pose long-term questions about
the representativeness of water samples collected from the well.
As with other phases of monitoring well construction, fluids
(clean) should only be added when no other practicable method
exists for proper filter pack emplacement. An additional discus-
sion on choosing filter pack material size can be found in the
section entitled "Artificially Filter-Packed Wells."
Placement of filter packs by gravity or free fall can be
successfully accomplished only in relatively shallow wells
where the probability of bridging or segregation of the filter
pack material is minimized. Bridging causes unfilled voids in
the filter pack and may prevent the filter pack material from
reaching the intended depth. Segregation of filter pack material
can result in a well that consistently produces sediment-laden
water samples. Segregation is a problem particularly in wells
with a shallow static water level. In this situation, the filter pack
material falls through the column of water at different rates. The
greater drag exerted on smaller particles due to their greater
surface area-to-weight ratio causes finer grains to fall at a
slower rate than coarser grains. Thus, coarser materials will
comprise the lower portion of the filter pack and finer materials
will constitute the upper part (figure 64). Segregation may not
be a problem when emplacing truly uniform filter packs where
the uniformity coefficient is less than 2.5, but placement by free
fall is not recommended in any other situation (Driscoll, 1986).
With the tremie pipe emplacement method, the filter pack
material is introduced through a rigid tube or pipe via gravity
directly into the interval adjacent to the well intake (Figure 65).
Initially, the end of the pipe is positioned at the bottom of the
well intake/borehole annulus. The filter pack material is then
poured down the tremie pipe and the tremie is raised periodi-
cally to allow the filter pack material to fill the annular space
around the well intake. The minimum diameter of a tube used
for a tremie pipe is generally 1 1/2 inches; larger-diameter pipes
are advisable for filter pack materials that are coarse-grained or
characterized by uniform it y coefficients that exceed 2.5 (Cali-
fornia Department of Health Services, 1986). When installing
a filter pack with a uniformity coefficient greater than 2.5 in
wells deeper than 250 feet, a variation of the standard tremie
Fine portion
of filter pack
Coarse portion
of filter pack
Well intake
Figure 64. Segregation of artificial filter pack materials caused
by gravity emplacement.
Sand
Casing
Well intake
•4— Tremie pipe
- Borehole wall
• Filter pack material
Figure 65. Tremie-pipe emplacement of artificial filter pack
materials.
106
-------
method that employs a pump to pressure feed the materials into
the annulus is suggested by the California Department of Health
Services (1986).
In the reverse circulation method, a filter pack material and
water mixture is fed into the annulus around the well intake.
Return flow of water passes into the well intake and is then
pumped to the surface through the riser pipe/casing (Figure 66).
The filter pack material should be introduced into the annulus
at moderate rate to allow for an even distribution of material
around the well intake. Care must be exercised when pulling the
outer casing so that the riser pipe is not also pulled.
Backwashing filter pack material into place is accom-
plished by allowing filter pack material with a uniformity
coefficient of 2.5 or less to fall freely through the annulus while
concurrently pumping clean fresh water down the casing,
through the well intake and back up the annulus (Figure 67).
Backwashing is a particularly effective method of filter-pack
emplacement in cohesive, non-caving geologic materials. This
method also minimizes the formation of voids that tend to occur
in tremie pipe emplacement of the filter pack.
Annular Seal Installation
The two principal materials used for annular seals are
bentonite and neat cement. Often a combination of the two
materials is used. Because the integrity of ground-water samples
depends on good seals, the proper emplacement of these seals
Funner
Filter pack
material |£
and water T~
Pump
6" Casing
(Casing pulled back during '
filter pack installation)
Riser pipe
Centralizer —
Filter pack
Well intake
I
Si
1
11
Water
Fine-grained
materials and
water
Filter pack
material
Fine-grained
materials and
water
Well intake
Figure 66. Reverse-circulation emplacement of artificial filter
pack materials.
Figure 67. Emplacement of artificial filter pack material by
backwashing.
is paramount. An additional discussion on annular seals can be
found in the section entitled "Annular Seals. "
Bentonite —
Bentonite may be emplaced as an annular seal in either of
two different forms 1) as a dry solid or 2) as a slurry. Typically
only pelletized or granular bentonite is emplaced dry; powdered
bentonite is usually mixed with water at the surface to form a
slurry and then is added to the casing/borehole annulus. Addi-
tional discussion on properties of bentonite can be found in
Chapter 5 in the section entitled "Materials Used For Annular
Seals."
Dry granular bentonite or bentonite pelletsmay be emplaced
by the gravity (free fall) method by pouring from the ground
surface. This procedure should only be used in relatively
shallow monitoring wells that are less than 30 feet deep with an
annular space of 3 inches or greater. When the gravity method
is used, the bentonite should be tamped with a tamping rod after
it has been emplaced to ensure that no bridging of the pellets or
granules has occurred. Where significant thicknesses of bento-
nite are added, tamping should be done at selected intervals
during the emplacement process. In deeper wells, particularly
where static water levels are shallow, emplacing dry bentonite
107
-------
via the gravity method introduces both a very high potential for
bridging and the likelihood that sloughing material from the
borehole wall will be included in the seal. If bridging occurs, the
bentonite may never reach the desired depth in the well; if
sloughing occurs, "windows" of high permeability may de-
velop as the sloughed material is incorporated into the seal.
Either situation results in an ineffective annular seal that may
allow subsequent contamination of the well.
In wells deeper than 30 feet, granular or pelletized bento-
nite can be conveyed from the surface directly to the intended
depth in the annulus by a tremie pipe. Pelletized bentonite is
sometimes difficult to work with in small-diameter tremie
pipes; a minimum of 1 1/2-inch inside diameter pipe should be
used with 1/4-inch diameter pellets to minimize bridging and
subsequent clogging of the bentonite inside the tremie pipe.
Larger-diameter tremie pipes should be used with larger-diam-
eter pellets. Where a seal of either pelletized or granular
bentonite must be placed at considerable depth beneath the
water surface, the tremie pipe can be kept dry on the inside by
keeping it under gas pressure (Riggs and Hatheway, 1986). A
dry tremie pipe has a much lower potential for bridging in the
tremie because the material does not have to fall through a
partially water-filled pipe to reach the desired depth.
Bentonite slurry can bean effective well seal only if proper
mixing, pumping, and emplacement methods are used. Bento-
nite powder is generally mixed with water in a batch mixer and
the slurry is pumped under positive pressure through a tremie
pipe down the annular space using some variety of positive
displacement pump (i.e., centrifugal, piston, diaphragm, or
moyno-type pump). All hoses, tubes, pipes, water swivels, and
other passageways through which the slurry must pass should
have a minimum inside diameter of 1/2 inch. A larger diameter
(e.g., 1-inch) tremie pipe is preferred. The tremie pipe should be
placed just above the falter pack or at the level where non-
cohesive material has collapsed into the borehole (Figure 68).
The tremie pipe should be left at this position during the
emplacement procedure so that the slurry fills the annulus
Slurry
Annular seal material
Fitterpack
Figure 68. Tremie-pipe emplacement of annular seal material
(either bentonite or neat cement slurry).
upward from the bottom. This allows the slurry to displace
ground water and any loose-formation materials in the annular
space. The tremie pipe can be raised as the slurry level rises as
long as the discharge of the pipe remains submerged at least a
foot beneath the top of the slurry. The tremie pipe can be
removed after the slurry has been emplaced to the intended level
in the annulus. The slurry should never be emplaced by free fall
down the annulus. Free fall permits the slurry to segregate thus
preventing the formation of an effective annular seal.
Bentonite emplaced as a slurry will already have been
hydrated to some degree prior to emplacement, but the ability
to form a tight seal depends on additional hydration and
saturation after emplacement. Unless the slurry is placed adja-
cent to saturated geologic materials, sufficient moisture may
not be available to maintain the hydrated state of the bentonite.
If the slurry begins to dry out, the seal may dessicate, crack, and
destroy the integrity of the seal. Therefore, bentonite seals are
not recommended in the vadose zone.
Curing or hydration of the bentonite seal material occurs
for 24 to 72 hours after emplacement. During this time, the
slurry becomes more rigid and eventually develops strength.
Well development should not be attempted until the bentonite
has completely hydrated. Because of the potential for sample
chemical alteration posed by the moderately high pH and high
cation exchange capacity of bentonite, a bentonite seal should
be placed approximately 2 to 5 feet above the top of the well
intake and separated from the filter pack by a 1-foot thick layer
of fine silica sand.
Neat Cement —
As with a bentonite slurry, a neat cement grout must be
properly mixed, pumped, and emplaced to ensure that the
annular seal will be effective. According to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (1975), neat cement should
only be emplaced in the annulus by free fall when 1) there is
adequate clearance (i.e., at least 3 inches) between the casing
and the borehole, 2) the annulus is dry, and 3) the bottom of the
annular space to be filled is clearly visible from the surface and
not more than 30 feet deep. However, to minimize segregation
of cement even in unsaturated annular spaces, free fall of more
than 15 feet should not be attempted in monitoring wells. If a
neat cement slurry is allowed to free fall through standing water
in the annulus, the mixture tends to be diluted or bridge after it
reaches the level of standing water and before it reaches the
intended depth of emplacement. The slurry also may incorpo-
rate material that is sloughed from the borehole wall into the
seal. If the sloughed material has a high permeability y, the
resultant seal can be breached through the inclusion of the
sloughed material.
In most situations, neat cement grout should be emplaced
by a tremie pipe. The annular space must be large enough that
a tremie pipe with a minimum inside diameter of 1 1/2 inches
can be inserted into the annulus to within a few inches of the
bottom of the space to be sealed. Grout may then either be
pumped through the tremie pipe or emplaced by gravity flow
through the tremie pipe into the annular space. The use of a
tremie pipe permits the grout to displace ground water and force
loose formation materials ahead of the grout. This positive
displacement minimizes the potential for contamination and/or
108
-------
dilution of the slurry and the bridging of the mixture with upper
formation material.
In pressure grouting, the cement discharges at the bottom
of the annular space and flows upward around the inner casing
until the annular space is completely filled. A side discharge
tremie may be used to lessen the possibility that grout might be
forced into the filterpack. Depending on pressure requirements,
the tremie pipe may be moved upward as the slurry is emplaced
or it may be left at the bottom of the annulus until the grouting
is completed. If the tremie pipe is not retracted while grouting,
the tremie pipe should be removed immediately afterward to
avoid the possibility y of the grout setting around the pipe. If this
occurs, the pipe may be difficult to remove and/or a channel
may develop in the grout as the pipe is removed.
In gravity emplacement, the tremie is lowered to the
bottom of the annular space and filled with cement. The tremie
pipe is slowly retracted, and the weight of the column forces the
cement into the annular space. In both gravity emplacement and
pressure grouting, the discharge end of the tremie pipe should
remain submerged at least one foot below the surface of the
grout at all times during emplacement, and the pipe should be
kept full of grout without air space. To avoid the formation of
cold joints, the grout should be emplaced in one continuous
pour before initial setting of the cement or before the mixture
loses fluidity. Curing time required for a typical Type I Portland
cement to reach maximum strength is a minimum of 40 hours.
Moehrl (1%4) recommends checking the buoyancy force
on the casing during cementing with grout. Archimedes prin-
ciple states that a body wholly or partially immersed in a fluid
is buoyed up by a force equal to the weight of the fluid displaced
by the body. Failure to recognize this fact may result in
unnoticed upward displacement of the casing during cement-
ing. This is particularly true of lighter thermoplastic well
casings. Formulas for computing buoyancy are provided by
Moehrl (1964).
Types of Well Completions
The ultimate configuration of a monitoring well is chosen
to fulfill specific objectives as stated at the beginning of this
section. Monitoring wells can be completed either as single
wells screened in either short or long intervals, single wells
screened in multiple zones or multiple wells completed at
different intervals in one borehole. The decision as to which
type of monitoring well configuration to install in a specific
location is based on cost coupled with technical considerations
and practicality of installation.
In shallow installations, it generally is more economical to
complete the monitoring wells as individual units that are in
close proximity to each other and avoid the complexity of
multiple-zone completions in a single borehole. In deeper
installations where the cost of drilling is high relative to the cost
of the materials in the well and where cost savings can be
realized in improved sampling procedures, it may be better to
install a more sophisticated multilevel sampling device. The
cost of these completions are highly variable depending on the
specific requirements of the job. Cost comparisons should be
made on a site-by-site basis. Individual well completions will
almost always be more economical at depths of less than 80
feet. A discussion of the types of monitoring well completions
is presented below.
Single-Riser/Limited-Interval Wells
The majority of monitoring wells that arc installed at the
present time are individual monitoring wells screened in a
specific zone. Well intakes are usually moderate in length,
ranging from 3 to 10 feet. These wells are individually installed
in a single borehole with a vertical riser extending from the well
intake to the surface. Because the screened interval is short,
these are the easiest wells to install and develop. A typical
example of this design is shown in Figure 21.
The intent of a well with this design is to isolate a specific
zone from which water-quality samples and/or water levels are
to be obtained. If the well intake crosses more than one zone of
permeability, the water sample that is collected will represent
the quality of the more permeable zone. If a pump is installed
just above the well intake and the well is discharged at a high
rate, the majority of the sample that is obtained will come from
the upper portion of the well intake. If the pump is lowered to
the mid-section of the well intake and pumped at a low rate, the
bulk of the sample will come from the area that is immediately
adjacent to the zone of the pump intake. At high pumping rates
in both isotropic and stratified formations, flow lines converge
toward the pump so that the sample that is obtained is most
representative of the ground water moving along the shortest
flow lines. If the well is not properly sealed above the well
intake, leakage may occur from upper zones into the well
intake.
Single-Riser/Flow-Through Wells
Flow-through wells consist of a long well intake that either
fully or nearly fully penetrates the aquifer. The well intake is
connected to an individual riser that extends to the surface.
Wells of this type are typically small in diameter and are
designed to permit water in the aquifer to flow through the well
in such a manner as to make the well "transparent" in the
ground-water flow field. An illustration of this type of well is
shown in Figure 69.
This type of well produces water samples that area com-
posite of the water quality intercepted when the well is surged,
Surface protector
Casing or riser
Figure 69. Diagram of a single-riser/flow-through well.
109
-------
bailed or pumped heavily. For example, if three or more well
volumes are evacuated prior to sampling, the sample obtained
will be a composite sample representative of the more perme-
able zones penetrated by the well intake; it will not be possible
to define the zone(s) of contribution. However, if the well is
allowed to maintain a flow-through equilibrium condition and
if a sampler is lowered carefully to the selected sampling depth,
a minimally disturbed water sample can be obtained by either
taking a grab sample or by pumping at a very low rate. This
sample will be substantially representative of the zone in the
immediate vicinity of where the sample was taken. If the
sampler is successively lowered to greater depths and the water
within the well intake is not agitated, a series of discrete samples
can be obtained that will provide a reasonably accurate profile
of the quality of the water that is available in different vertical
zones. Furthermore, if the flow-through condition is allowed to
stabilize after any prior disturbance and a downhole chemical-
profiling instrument is lowered into the well, closely-spaced
measurements of parameters such as Eh, pH, dissolved oxygen,
conductivity and temperature can be made in the borehole. This
provides a geochemical profile of conditions in the aquifer. In
specific settings, wells of this design can provide water-quality
information that is at least as reliable as either the information
obtained by multiple-zone samplers in a single well or by
information from multiple nested wells. In either application,
the described flow-through well design is lower in cost.
Nested Wells
Nested wells consist of either a series of 1) single-riser/
limited-interval wells that are closely spaced so as to provide
data from different vertical zones in close proximity to each
other or 2) multiple single-riser/limited-interval wells that are
constructed in a single borehole. Illustrations of these designs
are shown in Figures 70a and 70b. Wells of these designs are
used to provide samples from different zones of an aquifer(s) in
the same manner as individual wells.
Multiple wells are constructed in a single borehole by
drilling a 10-inch or larger diameter borehole, then setting one,
two, or three 2-inch single-riser/limited-interval wells within
the single borehole. The deepest well intake is installed first, the
filter pack emplaced, and the seal added above the filter pack.
The filter pack provides stabilization of the deepest zone. After
the seal is installed above the deepest zone, the next succeeding
(upward) well intake is installed and the individual riser ex-
tended to the surface. This next well intake is filter-packed and
TR£|T
/fellWH
(a)
(b)
Figure 70. Typical nested well designs: a) series of single riser/limited interval wells in separate boreholes and b) multiple single
riser/limited interval wells In a single borehole (after Johnson, 1983).
110
-------
a second seal is placed above the filter pack that is emplaced
around the second well intake. If there is a long vertical interval
between successive well intakes, neat cement grout is emplaced
above the lower seal. Where vertical separation permits, a 1-
foot layer of fine silica sand should be emplaced between the
filter packs and sealants. This sand helps prevent sealant infil-
tration into the filter pack and loss of filter pack into the sealant.
This procedure is repeated at all desired monitoring intervals.
Because each riser extends to the surface and is separate from
the other risers, a good seal must be attained around each riser
as it penetrates through successive bentonite seals. A substan-
tial problem with this type of construction is leakage along the
risers as well as along the borehole wall.
The primary difficulty with multiple completions in a
single borehole is that it is difficult to be certain that the seal
placed between the screened zones does not provide a conduit
that results in interconnection between previously non-con-
nected zones within the borehole. Of particular concern is
leakage along the borehole wall and along risers where overly-
ing seals are penetrated. It is often difficult to get an effective
seal between the seal (e.g., bentonite or cement grout) and the
material of the risers.
Multiple-Level Monitoring Wells
In addition to well nests that sample at multiple levels in a
single location, a variety of single-hole, multilevel sampling
devices are available. These sampling devices range from the
simple field-fabricated, PVC multilevel sampler shown, in
Figure 71 to the buried capsule devices that are installed in a
single borehole, as shown in Figure 72. The completion of these
wells is similar to the completion of nested wells in a single
borehole. Some of these samplers have individual tubing con-
nections that extend to the surface. Samples are collected from
the tubing. With some forms of instrumentation, water levels
can also be obtained. There are, additionally, more sophisti-
cated sampling devices available, such as shown in Figure 73.
These consist of multiple-zone inflatable packers that can be
installed in a relatively small borehole. They permit the sam-
pling of formation fluids at many intervals from within a single
borehole. Disadvantages of these devices arc: 1) it is difficult,
if not impossible, to repair the device if clogging occurs, 2) it is
difficult to prevent and/or evaluate sealant and packer leakage
and 3) these installations are more expensive than single-level
monitoring wells.
Simple vacuum-lift multiple port devices can be used in
shallow wells where samples can be obtained from the indi-
vidual tubing that extends to the surface. With increasing depth,
greater sophistication is required and a variety of gas-lift
sampling devices are available commercially. Still more so-
phisticated sampling devices are available for very deep instal-
lations. These devices require durable, inflatable packer sys-
tems and downhole tools to open and close individual ports to
obtain formation pressure readings and take fluid samples.
These can be used in wells that are several thousand feet deep.
Ground
Water table
End cap
Male & female
/ couplings
' Surface
PVC pipe
Coupling
Sampling points
End cap
(a)
PVC pipe
— Screen
One-hole
rubber
stopper
(b)
Figure 71, Field-fabricated PVC multilevel sampler: a) field installation and b) cross section of sampling point (Pickens et al., 1981).
Ill
-------
Protective
casing
Screened
interval
Sampling
tube
Backfill
Packet
Pumping port coupling
Measurement port coupling
End cap
Figure 72. Multilevel capsule sampling device installation
(Johnson, 1983).
General Suggestions for Well Completions
I) Use formation samples, sample penetration logs,
drilling logs, geophysical logs, video logs and all
other pertinent information that can be obtained
relating to the well installation to make decisions
on well completion. Make every attempt to define
the stratigraphy before attempting to install well
intakes.
2) Be aware of the control that stratigraphy exerts
over flow-line configuration when the sampling
pump is and is not operating. In an isotropic
aquifer, the sample is representative of the quality
of formation water in the immediate vicinity of
the pump. In a fractured system or a stratified
aquifer, flow can be highly directional and
confined.
3) Install the well intake in the exact zone opposite
the desired monitoring depth. If the well is designed
to intercept "floaters," the well intake must extend
high enough to provide for fluctuations in the
seasonal water table. If the well is designed to
monitor "sinkers" the topography of the bottom-
most confining layer must be sufficiently defined
such that a well intake can be installed at the
topographical points where the sinkers can be
intercepted. If there is a non-aqueous phase present,
the well intake must intersect the appropriate
pathways. Vertical variations in hydraulic
conductivity must be recognized as well as
horizontal variations. In consolidated rock,
fracture zones through which migration can occur
must be intercepted. At all times, the three-
Figure 73. Multiple zone inflatable packer sampling installation
(Rehtlane and Patton, 1982).
dimensional aspect of contaminant migration must
be taken into consideration.
4) Aquifer disruption must be minimized during the
completion process. Void space should not be
unnecessarily created when pulling back casing
or augers. Non-cohesive material collapse around
the well intake should be minimized except where
natural filter pack is used.
5) The depth and diameter limitations imposed by
the type of equipment and materials used in
monitoring well construction must be considered
as an integral part of well completion. The filter
pack must be uniformly emplaced; bentonite and
cement grout must be emplaced by positive
methods so that the zones that are supposed to be
isolated are truly isolated by positive seals. The
design and installation of a monitoring well are
impacted by the constraints of cost, but the errors
resulting from a well that is improperly constructed
are much more expensive than a well that is
properly constructed. The extra time and cost of
constructing a well properly, and being as sure as
possible that the information being obtained is
reliable, is well worth the extra cost of careful
installation.
References
California Department of Health Services, 1986. The
California site mitigation decision tree manual; California
Department of Health Services, Sacramento, California,
375 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
112
-------
Johnson, Thomas L., 1983. A comparison of well nests versus
single-well completions; Ground Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 76-78.
Moehrl, Kenneth E., 1964. Well grouting and well protection;
Journal of the American Water Works Association, vol. 56,
no. 4, pp. 423-431.
Pickens, J.F., J.A. Cherry, R.M. Coupland, G.E. Gnsak, W.F.
Merritt and B.A. Risto, 1981. A multilevel device for
ground-water sampling; Ground Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 48-51.
Rehtlane, Erik A. and Franklin D. Patton, 1982. Multiple port
piezometers vs. standpipe piezometers: an economic
comparison; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water
Monitoring, National Water Well Association,
Worthington, Ohio, pp. 287-295.
Riggs, Charles 0. and Allen W. Hatheway, 1988. Groundwater
monitoring field practice - an overview; Ground-Water
Contamination Field Methods, Collins and Johnson editors,
ASTM Publication Code Number 04-963000-38,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 121-136.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975.
Manual of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Supply,
EPA-570/9-75-001,156pp.
113
-------
Section 7
Monitoring Well Development
Introduction/Philosophy
The objective of monitoring well development is fre-
quently misconstrued to be merely a process that enhances the
flow of ground water from the formation into the well and that
minimizes the amount of sediment in the water samples col-
lected from the well. These are the proper objectives for the
development of a production well but they do not fulfill the
requirements for a monitoring well. A monitoring well should
be a "transparent", window into the aquifer from which samples
can be collected that are truly representative of the quality of
water that is moving through the formation. This objective is
difficult to attain and is unattainable in some instances. How-
ever, the objective should not be abandoned because of the
difficulty.
The interpretation of any ground-water sample collected
from a monitoring well should reflect the degree of success that
has been reached in the development of the well and the
collection of the sample. This objective is frequently overlooked
in the literature and in much of the work that has been done in
the field. Further research is required before the reliability of
samples taken from a monitoring well can" be effectively sub-
stantiated. The United States Environmental Protection Agency
(1986) in the Technical Enforcement Guidance Document
(TEGD) states that, "a recommended acceptance/rejection
value of five nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) is based on
the need to minimize biochemical activity and possible interfer-
ence with ground-water sample quality." The TEGD also out-
lines a procedure for determining the source of turbidity and
usability of the sample and well. There are instances where
minimizing turbidity and/or biochemical activity will result in
a sample that is not representative of water that is moving
through the ground. If the ground water moving through the
formation is, in fact, turbid, or if there is free product moving
through the formation, then some criteria may cause a well to be
constructed such that the actual contaminant that the well was
installed to monitor will be filtered out of the water. Therefore,
it is imperative that the design, construction and development
of a monitoring well be consistent with the objective of obtain-
ing a sample that is representative of conditions in the ground.
An evaluation of the degree of success in attaining this objective
should always be included and considered in conjunction with
the laboratory and analytical work that is the final result of the
ground-water sample-collection process.
If the ultimate objective of a monitoring well is to provide
a representative sample of water as it exists in the formation,
then the immediate objective and challenge of the development
program is to restore the area adjacent to the well to its
indigenous condition by correcting damage done to the forma-
tion during the drilling process. This damage may occur in
many forms: 1) if a vibratory method such as driving casing is
used during the drilling process, damage may be caused by
compaction of the sediment in place; 2) if a compacted sand and
gravel is drilled by a hollow-stem auger and then allowed to
collapse around the monitoring well intake, damage may be the
resultant loss of density of the natural formation; 3) if a drilling
fluid of any type is added during the drilling process, damage
may occur by the infiltration of filtrate into the formation; and
4) if mud rotary, casing driving or augering techniques are used
during drilling, damage may be caused by the formation of a
mudcake or similar deposit that is caused by the drilling
process. Other formatation damage may be related to specific
installations. Some of this damage cannot be overcome satis-
factorily by the current capability to design and develop a
monitoring well. One important factor is the loss of stratifica-
tion in the monitored zone. Most natural formations are strati-
fied; the most common stratigraphic orientation is horizontal.
The rate of water movement through different stratigraphic
horizons varies, sorption rates may differ as stratigraphy changes;
and chemical interaction between contaminants and the forma-
tion materials and ground water can vary between different
horizons. During the development process, those zones with the
highest permeability will be most affected by the development
of the well. Where a well intake crosses stratigraphic bound-
aries of varying permeability, the water that moves into and out
of the well intake will be moving almost exclusively into and
out of the high permeability zones.
Factors Affecting Monitoring Well Development
There are three primary factors that influence the develop-
ment of a monitoring well: 1) the type of geologic material, 2)
the design and completion of the well and 3) the type of drilling
technology employed it? the well construction. From these
factors it is also possible to estimate the level of effort required
during development so that the monitoring well will perform
satisfactorily.
Type of Geologic Material
The primary geologic consideration is whether or not the
monitoring well intake will be installed in consolidated rock or
unconsolidated material. If the intake is installed in consoli-
dated rock or cohesive unconsolidated material, the assumption
can often be made that the borehole is stable and was stable
during the construction of the monitoring well. In a stable
borehole, it is generally easier to: 1) install the well intake(s) at
the prescribed setting(s), 2) uniformly distribute and maintain
the proper height of a filter pack (if one was installed) above the
well intake(s), 3) place the bentonite seal(s) in the intended
115
-------
location and 4) emplace a secure surface seal. However, if the
well intake is opposite unconsolidated material, the borehole
may not be or may not have been stable during well installation.
Depending on the degree of borehole instability during the well
completion process the well intake, filter pack, bentonite seal
and/or surface seal may not have been installed as designed. As
a consequence, there is generally a greater degree of difficulty
expected in the development of wells that are installed in
unconsolidated formations.
The permeability of the formation also influences the ease
of development. Where permeability is greater, water moves
more easily into and out of the formation and development is
accomplished more quickly. In unconsolidated formations, the
ease or difficulty of development is less predictable because
there is considerable variation in the grain size, sorting, and
stratification of many deposits. Zones that are developed and
water samples that are collected will be more representative of
the permeable portions of a stratified aquifer and may not be
very representative of the less permeable zones.
Design and Completion of the Well
A monitoring well can be installed relatively easily at a site
where the total depth of the well will be 25 feet; the static water
level is approximately 15 feet; and the monitored interval is a
clean, well-sorted sand and gravel with a permeability that
approximates 1 x 10' centimeters per second. However, a
monitoring well is much more difficult to install at a site where
the depth of the well will be 80 feet; the well will be completed
in an aquifer beneath an aquitard; the water table in the shallow
aquifer is approximately 20 feet deep; the piezometric surface
of the semi-confined aquifer is approximately 10 feet deep; and
the monitored interval in the deeper zone is composed of fine-
-grained sand with silt. Construction of the monitoring well in
this scenario will be difficult by any technique. No matter what
construction method is used, a considerable amount of time will
be required for well completion and problems can be anticipated
during setting of the well intake, placement of the filter pack,
placement of the bentonite seal or placement of the grout.
Difficulties may also be experienced during the development
process.
Another difficult monitoring well installation is where the
well intake is placed opposite extremely fine-grained materials.
For example, extremely fine-grained materials often occur as a
series of interbedded fine sands and clays such as might be
deposited in a sequence of lake deposits. A well intake set in the
middle of these saturated deposits must be completed with an
artificial filter pack. However, because the deposits are un-
stable, it is difficult to achieve a good distribution of the filter-
pack material around the well intake during installation. Fur-
thermore, even if the filter pack installation is successful, it is
not possible to design a sufficiently fine-grained filter pack that
will prevent the intrusion of the clays that are intimately
associated with the productive fine-grained sand. As a conse-
quence, every time the well is agitated during the sampling
process, the clays are mobilized and become part or all of the
turbidity that compromises the value of the ground-water
samples. There currently is no design or development proce-
dures that are able to fully overcome this problem. The only way
to minimize the intrusion of the clays is to install an extremely
fine-grained porous filter. This falter has very limited utility
because it rapidly becomes clogged by the clays that are being
removed. After a short operational period, insufficient quanti-
ties of samples are obtained and the filter can no longer be used.
Where an artificial filter pack is installed, the filter pack
must be as thin as possible if the development procedures are to
be effective in removing fine participate material from the
interface between the filter pack and the natural formation.
Conversely, the filter pack must be thick enough to ensure that
during the process of construction, it is possible to attain good
distribution of the filter pack material around the screen. It is
generally considered that the minimum thickness of filter pack
material that can be constructed effectively is 2 inches. Two
inches is a desirable thickness in situations where there is
adequate control to ensure good filter pack distribution. If there
are doubts about the distribution, then the filter pack must be
thickened to assure that there is adequate filtration and borehole
support.
In natural filter pack installations where the natural forma-
tion is allowed to collapse around the well intake, the function
of development is twofold: 1) to remove the fine-particulate
materials that have been emplaced adjacent to the well intake
and 2) to restore the natural flow regime in the aquifer so that
water may enter the well unimpeded.
It is easier to develop monitoring wells that are larger in
diameter than it is to develop small-diameter wells. For ex-
ample, mechanical surging or bailing techniques that are effective
in large-diameter wells are much less effective when used in
wells that are less than 2 inches in diameter because equipment
to develop smaller-diameter wells has limited availability.
Further, in small-diameter wells when the depths become
excessive, it is difficult to maintain straightness and alignment
of the borehole because of the drilling techniques that are
commonly used. It may become imperative in this situation to
use centralizers on the casing and well intake that are being
installed within these boreholes or to use other methods to
center the casing or ensure straight holes.
Type of Drilling Technology
The drilling process influences not only development
procedures but also the intensity with which these procedures
must be applied. Typical problems associated with special
drilling technologies that must be anticipated and overcome are
as follows: 1) when drilling an air rotary borehole in rock
formations, fine particulate matter typically builds up on the
borehole walls and plugs fissures, pore spaces, bedding planes
and other permeable zones. This particulate matter must be
removed and openings restored by the development process; 2)
if casing has been driven or if augers have been used, the
interface between the natural formation and the casing or the
auger flights are "smeared" with fine-particulate matter that
must subsequently be removed in the development process; 3)
if a mud rotary technique is used, a mudcake builds upon the
borehole wall that must be removed during the development
process; and 4) if there have been any additives, as may be
necessary in mud rotary, cable tool or augering procedures, then
the development process must attempt to remove all of the
fluids that have infiltrated into the natural formation.
116
-------
Well Development
Very little research has been performed that specifically
addresses movement of fluid, with or without contaminants
present, through a stratified aquifer into monitoring wells.
Ground-water flow theory is based on the primary assumptions
of homogeneity and isotropism of the formation. In production
wells, these assumptions are acceptable because the aquifer is
stressed over a sufficient area for variations to be "averaged."
Most discussions of monitoring-well flow characteristics are
based on the acceptance of these assumptions. However, these
are not always valid assumptions for attaining the objectives of
monitoring wells.
Where it is intended to intercept a contaminant in a re-
stricted zone of a three-dimensional flow field, a monitoring
well must be installed and developed with a much greater
precision than is normal for production wells. The relative
movement of fluid in specific zones becomes significantly
more important than the gross yield. Both installation and
development must be performed with a "spot precision" that
preserves in situ conditions and permits the collection of a
representative sample.
The methods that are available for the development of
monitoring wells have been inherited from production well
development practices. These methods include: 1) surging with
a surge Mock, 2) bailing, 3) pumping, overpumping and
backwashing through the pump, 4) airlift pumping and 5) air
surging and jetting. A number of authors have written about
these available methods of development for monitoring wells.
A summary of these articles is contained in Table 36.
Based on a review of the literature and on a wide range of
actual field practices, a few generalizations about development
of monitoring wells can be made
1) using air for well development can result in
chemical alteration of the ground water both as a
result of chemical reaction with the air and as a
result of impurities introduced through the air
stream;
2) adding water to the borehole for stabilization,
surging, backwashing, flushing or any other
purpose has an unpredictable effect on ground-
water quality and at the very least causes dilution.
Even if the water added to the borehole was
originally pumped from the same formation,
chemical alteration of the ground water in the
formation can occur if the water is reinfected.
Once water has been pumped to the surface,
aeration can alter the original water quality;
3) developing the formation at the interface between
the outer perimeter of an artificial filter pack and
the inner perimeter of the borehole is extremely
difficult. Any mudcake or natural clay deposited
at this interface is very difficult to remove;
incomplete removal can have unquantifiable short-
and long-range impacts on the quality of the
sampled ground water;
4) developing a well is relatively easy when the well
intake is placed in a clean homogeneous aquifer of
relatively high permeability. It is very difficult to
develop a representative well in an aquifer that is
stratified, slowly permeable and fine-grained,
particularly where there is substantial variation
between the various stratified zones;
5) developing a larger-diameter monitoring well is
easier than developing a smaller-diameter well.
This is particularly true if the development is
accomplished by overpumping or backwashing
through the pump because suitable pumping
capacity is not commonly available for small-
diameter wells with deep static water levels.
However, a smaller-diameter well is more
"transparent" in the aquifer flow field and is
therefore more likely to yield a representative
sample,
6) collecting non-turbid sample may not be possible
because there are monitoring wells that cannot be
sufficiently developed by any available technique.
This may be the consequence of the existence of
turbid water in the formation or the inability to
design and construct a well that will yield water in
satisfactory quantity without exceeding acceptable
flow velocities in the natural formation;
7) applying many of the monitoring well-
development techniques in small-diameter (2-
inch) wells and using the design and construction
techniques discussed in the literature are easiest
in shallow monitoring situations with good
hydraulic conductivity. These techniques may be
impractical when applied to deeper or more
difficult monitoring situations.
8) Adding clean water of known quality for flushing
and/or jetting should be done only when no better
options are available. A record must be kept of the
quantities of water lost to the formation during the
flushing/jetting operation and every attempt must
be made to reestablish background levels in a
manner similar to that described in Barcelona et
al. (1985a) and/or the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (1986); and
9) dealing objectively with the conditions and
problems that exist for every installation is
essential. The problems encountered at each site
should be addressed and clearly presented in the
final report. Chemical analyses must be included
in the final report so that anyone evaluating these
analyses is able to understand the limitations of
the work.
Methods of Well Development
Monitoring well development is an attempt to remove fine
particulate matter, commonly clay and silt, from the geologic
formation near the well intake. If particulate matter is not
removed, as water moves through the formation into the well,
the water sampled will be turbid, and the viability of the water
quality analyses will be impaired. When pumping during well
development, the movement of water is unidirectional toward
the well. Therefore, there is a tendency for the particles moving
toward the well to "bridge" together or form blockages that
restrict subsequent particulate movement. These blockages
may prevent the complete development of the well capacity.
This effect potentially impacts the quality of the water dis-
charged. Development techniques should remove such bridges
117
-------
Table 36. Summary of Development Methods for Monitoring" Wells
Reference
gass (1966)
United States
Environmental
Protection
Agency (1966)
Overpumping
Works best in
clean coarse
formations and
some consolidated
rock; problems of
water disposal and
bridging
Effective develop-
ment requires flow
reversal or surges
to avoid bridges
Backwashing
Breaks up
bridging, low
cost & simple;
preferentially
develops
Indirectly indicates
method applicable;
formation water
should be used
Surge Block* Bailer
Can be effective;
size made for£2"-
well; preferential
development where
screen >5'; surge
inside screen
Applicable; forma- Applicable
tion water should
be used; in low-
yield formation,
Jetting
Consolidated
and uncon-
solidated
application;
opens fractures,
develops discrete
zones; disadvantage
is external water
needed
Airlift Pumping
Replaces air surg
ing; filter air
Air should not
be used
Air Surging
Perhaps most
widely used;
can entrain
air in form-
ation so as to
reduce per-
meability, affect
water qualify;
avoid if possible,
Air should not
be used
Barcelona et
al. ** (1963)
Staff et al.
(1901)
National
Council of the
Paper Industry
for Air and
Stream Im-
provement
(1961)
Productive wells;
surging by alternat-
ting pumping and
allowing to equili-
brate; hard to create
must be
sufficient entrance
velocities; often
use with airlift
Applicable
drawback of flow in
one direction;
smaller wells hard
to pump if water
level below suction
Suitable; periodic
removal of fines
outside water
source can be
used if analyzed
to evaluate impact
Productive walk;
use care to avoid
casing and screen
damage
Suitable; common
with cable to of;
not easily used
on other rigs
Applicable; caution
against collapse of
intake or plugging
screen with clay
Productive walk;
more common than
surge blocks but
not as effective
Suitable; use
sufficiently
heavy bailer;
advantage of
removing fines;
may be custom
made for small
diameters
Suitable
Effectiveness
depends on
geometry of
device; air
filtered; crew
may be
exposed to
contaminated
water; per-
turbed Eh in
sand and
gravel not
persistent for
more than a
few weeks
Suitable;
avoid injecting
air into intake;
chemical
interference;
air pipe never
inside screen
Methods introducing foreign materials should be
avoided (i.e., compressed air or water jets)
-------
Table 36. (Continued)
Reference
Everett (1960)
Keely and
Boateng
(1987 a and b)
Overpumping Beckwashing
Development opera-
tion must cause
flow reversal to
avoid bridging; can
alternate pump oft
and on'
Probably most Vigorous surging
desirable when action may not be
surged; second desirable due to
series of disturbance of
evacuation/ gravel pack
recovery cycles is
recommended after
resting the well for
24 hours; settlement
and loosening of
fines ocurs after
the first
development
attempt; not as
vigorous as
backwashing
Surge Block* Bailer
Suitable; periodic
bailing to remove
fines
Method quite
effective in
loosening fines but
may be inadvisable
in that filter pack
and fluids may be
displaced to degree
that damages value
as a filtering media
Jetting Airlift Pumping Air Surging
High velocity jets of
water generally
most effective; dis-
cret zones of
development
Popular but Air can become
less desirable; entrained behind
method dif- screen and
ferent from permeability
water wells;
water displaced
by short down-
ward bursts of
high-pressure injection;
important not to jet
air or water across
screen because fines
driven into screen
cause irreversible
blockage; may subsatantiafly
displace native fluids
reduce
Schalla and Landick (1986) report on special 2"- valved block
** For low hydraulic conductivity wells, flush water up annulus prior to sealing; afterwards pump
-------
and encourage the movement of participate into the well.
These participate can then be removed from the well by bailer
or pump and, in most cases, the water produced will subsequently
be clear and non-turbid.
One of the major considerations in monitoring well devel-
opment is the expense. In hard-to-develop formations, it is not
unusual for the development process to take several days before
an acceptable water quality can be attained. Because develop-
ment procedures usually involve a drilling rig, crew, support
staff and a supervising geologist, the total cost of the crew in the
field often ranges in cost from $100 to $200 per hour. Thus, the
cost of development can be the most expensive portion of the
installation of a monitoring-well network. When this hourly
cost is compared to an often imperceptible rate of progress,
there is a tendency to prematurely say either, "that is good
enough" or "it can't be done. "
In most instances, monitoring wells installed in consoli-
dated formations can be developed without great difficulty.
Monitoring wells also can usually be developed rapidly and
without great difficulty in sand and gravel deposits. However,
many installations are made in thin, silty and/or clayey zones.
It is not uncommon for these zones to be difficult to develop
sufficiently for adequate samples to be coil.xted.
Where the borehole is sufficiently stable, due to installa-
tion in sound rock or stable unconsolidated materials, and
where the addition of fluids dunng completion and develop-
ment is permissible, it is a good practice to precondition the
borehole by flushing with clean water prior to filter pack
installation. When water is added to the well, the quality of the
water must be analyzed so that comparisons can be made with
subsequent water-quality data. Flushing of monitoring wells is
appropriate for wells drilled by any method and aids in the
removal of mud cake (mud rotary) and other finely-ground
debris (air rotary, cable tool, auger) from the borehole wall. This
process opens clogged fractures and cleans thin stratigraphic
zones that might otherwise be non-productive. Flushing can be
accomplished by isolating individual open zones in the borehole
or by exposing the entire zone. If the entire zone is exposed,
cross connection of all zones can occur.
Where it is not permissible to add fluids during completion
and development, and the borehole is stable, mechanically
scraping or scratching the borehole wall with a scraper or wire
brush, can assist in removing participate from the borehole
wall. Dislodged particulate can be pumped or bailed from the
borehole prior to filter pack, casing and well intake installation.
Where the addition of fluid is permissible, the use of high-
-pressure jetting can be considered for screened intake develop-
ment in special applications. If jetting is used, the process
should usually be performed in such a manner that loosened
particulate are removed (e.g., bailing, pumping, flushing)
either simultaneously or alternately with the jetting. The disad-
vantages of using jetting even in "ideal conditions" are fourfold:
1) the water used in jetting is agitated, pumped, pressurized and
discharged into the formation; 2) the fine (e.g., 10-slot, 20-slot)
slotted screens of most monitoring well intakes do not permit
effective jetting, and development of the material outside the
screen may be negligible or possibly detrimental; 3) there is
minimal development of the interface between the filter pack
and the wall of the borehole (Table 36) and 4) water that is
injected forcibly replaces natural formation fluids. These are
serious limitations on the usefulness of jetting as a development
procedure.
Air development forcibly introduces air into contact with
formation fluids, initiating the potential for uncontrolled
chemical reactions. When air is introduced into permeable
formations, there is a serious potential for air entrainment
within the formation. Air entrainment not only presents poten-
tial quality problems, but also can interfere with flow into the
monitoring well. These factors limit the use of air surging for
development of monitoring wells.
After due consideration of the available procedures for
well development, it becomes evident that the four most suit-
able methods for monitoring well development are: 1) bailing,
2) surge block surging, 3) pimping/overpimpk^ackwashing
and 4) combinations of these three methods.
Bailing
In relatively clean, permeable formations where water
flows freely into the borehole, bailing is an effective develop-
ment technique. The bailer is allowed to fall freely through the
borehole until it strikes the surface of the water. The contact of
the bailer produces a strong outward surge of water that is
forced from the borehole through the well intake and into the
formation. This tends to breakup bridging that has developed
within the formation. As the bailer fills and is rapidly with-
drawn, the drawdown created in the borehole causes the par-
ticulate matter outside the well intake to flow through the well
intake and into the well. Subsequent bailing removes the
particulate matter from the well. To enhance the removal of
sand and other particulate matter from the well, the bailer can
be agitated by rapid short strokes near the bottom of the well.
This agitation makes it possible to bail the particulate from the
well by suspending or slurrying the particulate matter. Bailing
should be continued until the water is free from suspended
particulate matter. If the well is rapidly and repeatedly bailed
and the formation is not sufficiently conductive, the borehole
will be dewatered. When this occurs, the borehole must be
allowed to refill before bailing is resumed. Care must be taken
that the rapid removal of the bailer does not cause the external
pressure on the well casing to exceed the strength of the casing
and/or well intake thereby causing collapse of the casing and/
or well intake.
Bailing can be conducted by hand on shallow wells,
although it is difficult to continue actively bailing for more than
about an hour. Most drill rigs are equipped with an extra line that
can be used for the bailing operation. The most effective
operation is where the bail line permits a free fall in the
downward mode and a relatively quick retrieval in the upward
mode. This combination maximizes the surging action of the
bailer. The hydraulic-powered lines on many rigs used in
monitoring-well installation operate too slowly for effective
surging. Bailing is an effective development tool because it
provides the same effects as both pumping and surging with a
surge block. The most effective equipment for bailing opera-
tions is generally available on cable tool rigs.
120
-------
There area variety of dart valve, flat bottom and sand pump
bailers availa ble for the development of larger-diameter wells.
These bailers are typically fabricated from steel and are oper-
ated by using a specially designated line on the rig. For most
monitoring-well applications, small-diameter PVC or
fluoropolymer bailers arc readily available. When commercial
bailers are not available, bailers can be fabricated from readily
available materials. Bailers of appropriate diameter, length,
material and weight should be used to avoid potential breakage
of the well casing or screen. Figures 74a and 74b show a
schematic representation of typical commercially available
small-diameter bailers.
Surge Block
Surge blocks, such as are shown in Figures 75 and 76, can
be used effectively to destroy bridging and to create the agita-
tion that is necessary to develop a well. A surge block is used
alternately with either a bailer or pump so that material that has
been agitated and loosened by the surging action is removed.
The cycle of surging-pumpingftailing is repeated until satisfac-
tory development has been attained.
During the development process, the surge block can be
operated either as an integral part of the drill rods or on a
wireline. In either event, the surge block assembly must be of
sufficient weight to free-fall through the water in the borehole
and create a vigorous outward surge. The equipment that lifts
or extracts the surge block after the downward plunge must be
strong enough to pull the surge block upward relatively
rapidly. The surge block by design permits some of the fluid to
bypass on the downward stroke, either around the perimeter of
the surge block or through bypass valves.
The surge block is lowered to the top of the well intake and
then operated in a pumping action with a typical stroke of
approximately 3 feet. The surging is usually initiated at the top
of the well intake and gradually is worked downward through
the screened interval, 'he surge block is removed at regular
intervals and the fine material that has been loosened is re-
moved by bailing and/or pumping. Surging begins at the top of
the well intake so that sand or silt loosened by the initial surging
action cannot cascade down on top of the surge block and
prevent removal of the surge block from the well. Surging is
initially gentle, and the energy of the action is gradually
increased during the development process. The vigor of the
surging action is controlled by the speed, length and stroke of
the fall and speed of retraction of the surge block. B y controlling
these rates, the surging activity can range from very rigorous to
very gentle.
Surging within the well intake can result in serious difficul-
ties. Vigorous surging in a well that is designed such that
excessive sand can be produced, can result in sand-locking the
surge block. This should not occur in a properly designed
monitoring well, nor should it occur if the surge block of
appropriate diameter is properly used. As in the case of bailer
surging, if excessive force is used, it is possible to cause the
collapse of the well intake and/or the casing.
An alternative to surging within the well intake is to
perform the surging within the casing above the well intake.
This has the advantage of minimizing the risk of sand locking.
However, it also reduces the effectiveness of the surging action.
In permeable material, the procedure of surging above the well
intake is effective only for well intakes with lengths of 5 feet or
less.
If the well is properly designed, and if 1) the surge block
is initially operated with short, gentle strokes above the well
intake, 2) sand is removed periodically by alternating sand
removal with surging, 3) the energy of surging is gradually
increased at each depth of surging until no more sand is
produced from surging at that depth, and 4) the depth of surging
is incrementally increased from top to bottom of the well intake,
then surging can be conducted effectively and safely.
Where there is sufficient annular space available within the
casing, which is seldom the case with monitoring wells, it is
effective to install a low-capacity pump above the surge block.
By discharging from the well concurrent with surging, a
gradient is maintained toward the well. This set-up assists in
developing the adjacent aquifer by maintaining the movement
of particulate material toward the well.
Surging is usually most effective when performed by cable
tool-type machines. The hydraulic hoisting equipment that is
normally available on most other types of drilling equipment
does not operate with sufficient speed to provide high-energy
surging. Where properly used, the surge block in combination
with bailing or pumping may be the most effective form of
mechanical development.
Pumping/Overpumpin/Backwashing
The easiest, least-expensive and most commonly em-
ployed technique of monitoring-well development is some
form of pumping. By installing a pump in the well and starting
the pump, ground-water flow is induced toward the well. Fine-
particulate material that moves into the well is discharged by the
pump. In overpumping, the pump is operated at a capacity that
substantially exceeds the ability of the formation to deliver
water. This flow velocity into the well usually exceeds the flow
velocity that will subsequently be induced during the sampling
process. This increased velocity causes rapid and effective
migration of particulate toward the pumping well and en-
hances the development process. Proper design is needed to
avoid well collapse, especially in deep wells. Both pumping and
overpumping are easily used in the development of a well.
Where there is no backflow-prevention valve installed, the
pump can be alternately started and stopped. This starting and
stopping allows the column of water that is initially picked up
by the pump to be alternately dropped and raised up in a surging
action. Each time the water column falls back into the well, an
outward surge of water flows into the formation. This surge
tends to loosen the bridging of the fine particles so that the
upward motion of the column of water can move the particles
into and out of the well. In this manner, the well can be pumped,
overpumped and back-flushed alternately until such time as
satisfactory development has been attained.
While the preceding procedures can effectively develop a
well, and have been used for many years in the development of
production wells, pumping equipment suitable to perform these
operations may not be available that will fit into some small-
diameter monitoring wells. To be effective as a development
tool, pumps must have a pumping capability that ranges from
121
-------
Standard
Sailer of
Teflon®
Standard
'Bailer of
Pvc
Bottom
Emptying
Device
Top for Variable
Capacity Point Source
Sailer of PVC
0
Retaining
Pin
Ball
Check
Sample
Chamber
1 Foot
Midsection
May Be Added
Here
Retaining
Pin
- Sell Check
(a)
(b)
Diagrams of typical bailers used in monitoring well development: a) standard type and b) "point source" bailer
(Timco Manufacturing Company, inc., 1982).
122
-------
Pressure-relief
Hole
Figure 75. Diagram of a typical surge block (Driscoll, 1986).
very low to very high or be capable of being controlled by
valving. The sampling pumps that are presently designed to fit
into small-diameter boreholes commonly do not provide the
upper range of capacities that often are needed for this type of
development. For shallow wells with water levels less than 25
feet deep, a suction-lift centrifugal pump can be used for
development in the manner prescribed. The maximum practical
suction lift attainable by this method is approximately 25 feet.
In practice, bailing or bailing and surging is combined with
pumping for the most-efficient well development. The bailing
or surging procedures are used to loosen bridges and move
material toward the well. A low-capacity sampling pump or
bailer is then used to remove turbid water from the well until the
quality is satisfactory. This procedure is actually less than
completely satisfactory, but is the best-available technology
with the equipment that is currently available.
Air lifting, without exposing the formations being devel-
oped directly to air, can be accomplished by properly imple-
mented pumping. To do this, the double pipe method of air
lifting is preferred. The bottom of the airlift should be lowered
to within no more than 10 feet of the top of the well intake, and
in no event should the air lift be used within the well intake. If
the air lift is used to surge the well, by alternating the air on and
off, there will be mixing of aerated water with the water in the
well. Therefore, if the well is to be pumped by air lifting, the
action should be one of continuous, regulated discharge. This
can be effectively accomplished only in relatively permeable
aquifers.
Where monitoring well installations are to be made in
formations that have low hydraulic conductivity, none of the
preceding well-development methods will be found to be
completely satisfactory. Barcelona et al. (1985a) recommend a
procedure that is applicable in this situation: "In this type of
geologic setting, clean water should be circulated down the well
casing, out through the well intake and gravel pack, and up the
open borehole prior to placement of the grout or seal in the
annulus. Relatively high water velocities can be maintained,
and the mudcake from the borehole wall will be broken down
effectively and removed. Flow rates should be controlled to
prevent floating the gravel pack out of the borehole. Because of
the relatively low hydraulic conductivity of geologic materials
outside the well, a negligible amount of water will penetrate the
formation being monitored. However, immediately following
the procedure, the well sealant should be installed and the well
pumped to remove as much of the water used in the develop-
ment process as possible."
All of the techniques described in this section are designed
to remove the effects of drilling from the monitored zone and,
insofar as possible, to restore the formations penetrated to
indigenous conditions. To this end, proposed development
techniques, where possible, avoid the use of introduced fluids,
including air, into the monitored zone during the development
process. This not only minimizes adverse impacts on the quality
of water samples, but also restricts development options that
would otherwise be available.
References
Barcelona, MJ., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfnch and E.E. Garske,
1985a. Practical guide for ground-water sampling; Illinois
State Water Survey, SWS Contract Report 374, Champaign,
Illinois, 93 pp.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb and R. Miller, 1983. A guide to the
selection of materials for monitoring well construction and
ground-water sampling; Illinois State Water Survey, SWS
Contract Report 327, Champaign, Illinois, 78 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Everett, Lome G., 1980. Ground-water monitoring; General
Electric Company technology marketing operation,
Schenectady, New York, 440 pp.
Gass, Tyler E., 1986. Monitoring well development; Water
Well Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 52-55.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987a. Monitoring well
installation, purging and sampling techniques part 1:
conceptualization Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 300-
313.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987b. Monitoring well
installation, purging, and sampling techniques part 2: case
histories; Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 427-439.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement 1981. Ground-water quality monitoring well
construction and placement; Stream Improvement
Technical Bulletin Number 342, New York, New York,
39pp.
Scalf, M.R., J.F. McNabb, WJ. Dunlap, R.L. Cosby and J.
Fryberger, 1981. Manual of ground-water sampling
123
-------
procedures; National Water Well Association, 93 pp.
Schall, Ronald and Robert W. Landick, 1986. A new valved
and air-vented surge plunger for developing small-diameter
monitor wells; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 6,
no. 2, pp. 77-80.
Timco Manufacturing Company, Inc., 1982. Geotechnical
Products; product literature, Prairie Du Sac, Wisconsin, 24
pp.
United States Environmental protection Agency, 1986.
RCRA ground-water monitoring technical enforcement
guidance document; Office of Waste Programs
Enforcement, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response," OSWER-9950.1, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 317 pp.
Water Ports (025" O.D )
Air Vent Passage
(0375"OD)
Cross Section
A-A'
•f*- Polypropylene Tube (0.375" O.D.)
Stainless Steel Cable (0.063* O.D.
Ferrule
Stainless Steel Hex Nut (0.63")
"• Viton Discs (0.05" Thick. 2.1 O.D. &
0.68 I.D.)
-A'
SCH 80 PVC Pipe (1.90" O.D.)
Top Fitting
NPT Threading
Stainless Steel Coupling
(1.325'O.D.)
Stainless Steel Pipe
(1.067'O.D.)
SCH 80 PVC Pipe (1.90" O.D.)
Bottom Fitting
Stainless Steel Hex Nut (0.63")
Air Vent Ports (0.63")
Stainless Steel Tube (0.375" O.D.)
' Swage Block
Figure 76. Diagram of a specialized monitoring well surge block (Schalla and Landick, 1966).
124
-------
Section 8
Monitoring Well Network Management Considerations
Well Documentation
Records are an integral part of any monitoring system.
Comprehensive records should be kept that document data
collection at a specific site. These data include boring records,
geophysical data, aquifer analysis data, ground-water sampling
results and abandonment documentation. Armed with as much
data as possible for the site, an effective management strategy
for the monitoring well network can be instituted.
Excellent records of monitoring wells must be kept for any
management strategy to be effective. Documentation of moni-
toring well construction and testing must frequently be pro-
vided as part of a regulatory program. Many states require
drillers to file a well log to document well installation and
location. Currently, some states have adopted or are adopting
regulations with unique reporting requirements specifically for
monitoring wells. At the state and federal level, guidance
documents have been developed that address reporting require-
ments. Tables 37, 38 and 39 illustrate some of the items that
various states have implemented to address monitoring well
Recordkeeping. Table 40 shows the recommendations of the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (1986). An
additional discussion on field documentation can be found in
the section entitled "Recordkeeping. "
The most critical factor in evaluating or reviewing data
from a monitoring well is location. If a monitoring well cannot
be physically located in the field and/or on a map in relationship
to other wells, only limited interpretation of the data is possible.
All monitoring wells should be properly located and referenced
to a datum. The degree of accuracy for vertical and horizontal
control for monitoring well location should be established and
held constant for all monitoring wells. In many cases, a licensed
surveyor should be contracted to perform the survey of the
wells. With few exceptions, vertical elevations should be refer-
enced to mean sea level and be accurate to 0.01 foot (Brownlee,
1985). Because elevations are surveyed during various stages
of well/boring installation, careful records must be kept as to
where the elevation is established. For example, if ground
elevation is determined during the drilling process, no perma-
nent elevation point usually can be established because the
ground is disturbed during the drilling process. A temporary pin
can be established close to the well location for use in later more
accurate measurements, but the completed well must be
resurveyed to maintain the desired accuracy of elevation. Each
completed well should have a standard surveyed reference
point. Because the top of the casing is not always level,
frequently the highest point on the casing is used. Brownlee
(1985) suggests that the standard reference point should be
consistent such that the north (or other) side of all monitoring
wells is the referenced point. Regardless of what point is
chosen, the surveyor should be advised before the survey is
conducted and the reference point clearly marked at each well.
If paint is used to mark the casing, the paint must not be allowed
on the inside of the casing. If spray paint is used, the aerosols can
coat the inside of the casing and may cause spurious water-
quality results in subsequent samples. An alternative way to
mark the casing is to notch the casing so that a permanent
reference point is designated. The United States Environmental
Protection Agency (1986) recommends that reference marks be
placed on both the casing and grout apron.
Well locations should clearly be marked in the field. Each
well should have a unique number that is clearly visible on the
well or protective casing. To ensure good documentation, the
well number may be descriptive of the method used to install the
well. For example, a well designated as C-l could represent the
first cored hole, or HS-3 could be a hollow-stem auger hole. If
multilevel sampling tubes are being used, each tube should be
clearly marked with the appropriate depth interval.
Well locations should be clearly marked on a map. The
map should also include roads, buildings, other wells, property
boundaries and other reference points. In general, maps illus-
trating comparable items should be the same scale. In addition
to the unique monitoring well number, general well designa-
tions may be desirable to include on the map. The Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources (1985) suggests that PIEZ
(piezometer), OW (observation well), PVT (private well),
LYS (lysimeter) and OTHER be used to clarify the function of
the wells.
Files should be kept on each monitoring well so that any
suspected problems with the monitoring well can be evaluated
based on previous well performance. The accuracy and com-
pleteness of the records will influence the ability of the reviewer
to make decisions based on historical data.
Well Maintenance and Rehabilitation
The purpose of maintaining a monitoring well is to extend
the life of the well and to provide representative levels and
samples of the ground water surrounding the well. Maintenance
includes proper documentation of factors that can be used as
benchmarks for comparison of data at a later point. A scheduled
maintenance program should be developed before sample qual-
ity is questioned. This section is designed to assist the user in
setting up a comprehensive maintenance schedule for a moni-
toring system.
Documenting Monitoring Well Performance
A monitoring well network should be periodically evalu-
ated to determine that the wells are functioning properly. Once
complete construction and "as-built" information is on file for
125
-------
Table 37. Comprehensive Monitoring Well Documentation (After Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1985)
Well Design:
• Length, schedule and diameter of casing
• Joint type (threaded, flush or solvent welded)
• Length, schedule and diameter of screen
• Percentage of open area in screen
• Slot size of screen
• Distance the filter pack extends above the screen
• Elevations of the top of well casing, bottom and top of protective
casing, ground surface, bottom of borehole, bottom of well
screen, and top and bottom of seal(s)
• Well location by coordinates or grid systems (example township
and range)
• Well location on plan sheet showing the coordinate system, scale,
a north arrow and a key
Materials:
• Casing and screen
• Filter pack (including grain size analysis)
• Seal and physical form
• Slurry or grout mix (percent cement, percent bentonite powder.
percent water)
Installation:
• Drilling method
• Drilling fluid (if applicable)
• Source of water (if applicable) and analysis of water
• Time period between the addition of backfill and construction of
well protection
Development:
• Date, time, elevation of water level prior to and after development
• Method used for development
• Time spent developing a well
• Volume of water removed
• Volume of water added (if applicable), source of water added
chemical analyses of water added
• Clarity of water before and after development
• Amount of sediment present at the bottom of the well
• pH, specific conductance and temperature readings
Soils Information:
• Soil sample test results
• Driller's observation or photocopied drillers log
Miscellaneous:
• Water levels and dates
• Well yield
• Any changes made in well construction, casing elevation, etc.
Table 38. Additional Monitoring Well Documentation (After Nebraska Department of Environmental Control, 1984)
Well identification number
Formation samples (depth and method of collection)
Water samples (depth, method of collection, and results)
Filter pack (depth, thickness, grain size analysis, placement method, supplier)
Date of all work
Name, address of consultant, drilling company and stratigraphic log preparer(s)
Description and results of pump or stabilization test if performed
Methods used to decontaminate drilling equipment and well construction material
Table 39. As. Built Construction Diagram information (After Connecticut Environmental Protection Agency, 1983)
• Top of ground surface
• Protective grouting and grading at ground surface
• Well casing length and depth
• Screen length and depth
• Location and extent of gravel pack
• Location and extent of bentonite seal
• Water table
• Earth materials stratigraphy throughout boring
• For rock wells, show details of bedrock seal
• For rock wells, indicate depths of water-bearing fractures, faults or fissures and approximate yield
each well, the well should be periodically re-evaluated to check
for potential problems. The following checks can be used as a
"first alert" for potential problems:
1) The depth of the well should be recorded every
time a water sample is collected or a water-level
reading taken. These depths should be reviewed
at least annually to document whether or not the
well is filling with sediment;
2) If turbid samples are collected from a well,
redevelopment of the existing well should be
considered or a new well should be installed if
necessary (Barcelona et al, 1985a);
3) Hydraulic conductivity tests should be performed
every 5 years or when significant sediment has
accumulated;
4) Slug or pump tests should be performed every 5
years. Redevelopment is necessary if the tests
126
-------
Table 40. Field Boring Log Information (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1988)
General:
• Project name
• Hole^iame/nuqjber*
• Date started and finished*
• Geologist's name*
• Driller's name*
• Sheet number
Information Columns:
.Depth"
.Sample location/number*
. Blow counts and advance rate
Narrative Description:
• Geologic observations:
• soil/rock type*
• color and stain*
• gross petrology*
- friability
• moisture content*
• degree of weathering*
• presence of carbonate*
• Drilling Observations:
• loss of circulation
• advance rates*
• rig chatter
• water levels*
• amount of air used, air pressure
• drilling difficulties*
. Other Remarks:
. equipment failures
.possible contamination"
.deviations from drilling plan"
. weather
• Hole location; map and elevation*
• Rig type
> Bit size/auger size*
> Petrologic lithologic classification scheme
used (Wen(worth, unified soil classification system)
• Percent sample recovery*
> Narrative description*
• Depth to saturation*
.fractures*
.solution cavities*
.bedding*
. discontinuities* - e.g., foliation
.water-bearing zones*
.formational strike and dip"
. fossils
. changes in drilling method or equipment*
.readings from detective equipment, if any*
.amount of water yield or loss during drilling
at different depths*
.dapositional structures*
.organic content*
.odor*
.suspected contaminant*
> amounts and types of any liquids used*
• running sands*
• caving/hole stability*
'Indicates items that the owner/operator should record at a minimum.
show that the performance of the well is
deteriorating;
5) Piezometric surface maps should be plotted and
reviewed at least annually; and
6) High and low water-level data for each well
should be examined at least every 2 years to
assure that well locations (horizontally and
vertically) remain acceptable. If the water level
falls below the top of the well intake, the quality
of the water samples collected can be altered.
Where serious problems are indicated with a well(s),
geophysical logs may be helpful in diagnosing maintenance
needs. Caliper logs provide information on diameter that may
be used to evaluate physical changes in the borehole or casing.
Gamma logs can be used to evaluate lithologic changes and can
be applied to ascertain whether or not well intakes are properly
placed. Spontaneous potential logs can locate zones of low
permeability where siltation may originate. Resistivity logs
identify permeable and/or porous zones to identify formation
boundaries. Television and photographic surveys can pinpoint
casing problems and well intake failure and/or blockage. When
used in combination, geophysical logs may save time and
money in identifying problem areas. An additional discussion
of the applicability and limitations of geophysical logging tools
can be found in the section entitled "Borehole Geophysical
Tools and Downhole Cameras."
Factors Contributing to Well Maintenance Needs
The maintenance requirements of a well are influenced by
the design of the well and the characteristics of the monitored
zones. Water quality, transmissivity, permeability, storage ca-
pacity, boundary conditions, stratification, sorting and fractur-
ing all can influence the need for and method(s) of well
maintenance. Table 41 lists major aquifer types by ground-
water regions and indicates the most prevalent problems with
operation of the wells in this type of rock or unconsolidated
deposit. Problems with monitoring wells are typically caused
by poor well design, improper installation, incomplete develop-
ment, borehole instability and chemical, physical and/or bio-
logical incrustation. A brief description of the major factors
leading to well maintenance are discussed below.
Design —
A well is improperly designed if hydrogeologic conditions,
water quality or well intake design are not compatible with the
purpose and use of the monitoring well. For example, if water
is withdrawn during the sampling process and the well screen is
plugged, the hydrostatic pressure on the outside of the casing
may be great enough to cause collapse of the well intake if the
strength of the material was not sufficient for the application.
This is particularly true if the well intake material was chemi-
cally incompatible with the ground water and was weakened
due to chemical reactions. Another example is where the
operational life of the monitoring well exceeds the design life.
127
-------
If a well was installed for short-term water level measurements
and the well ultimately is used for long-term sample collection,
problems with material comparability may occur. Additionally,
if the well intake openings are improperly sized and/or if the
filter pack is incorrectly designed or installed, siltation and
turbid water samples can result.
Installation —
If productive zones are not accurately identified during the
well drilling process, well intakes can be improperly located or
zones can be improperly sealed. Incorrect installation proce-
dures and/or difficulties may also cause dislocation of well
intakes and/or seals. Improperly connected or corroded casing
can separate at joints or collapse and cause interaquifer con-
tamination. Improperly mixed grout can form inadequate seals.
If casing centralizers are not used, grout distribution may be
inadequate. If the casing is corroded or the bentonite seal not
properly placed, grout may contaminate the water samples.
Drilling mud filtrate may not have been completely removed
during the development process. The surface seal could have
been deteriorated or could have been constructed improperly,
and surface water may infiltrate along the casing/borehole
annulus. The intake filter pack must be properly installed.
Development —
Drilling mud, natural fines or chemicals used during drill-
ing must be removed during the development process. If these
constituents are not removed, water-sample quality may be
compromised. Chemicals can also cause screen corrosion,
shale hydration or plugging of the well intake. In general, the
use of chemicals is not recommended and any water added
during the development process must be thoroughly tested.
Borehole stability —
Unstable boreholes contribute to casing failure, grout fail-
ure or screen failure. Borehole instability can be caused by
factors such as improper well intake placement, excessive
entrance velocity or shale hydration.
Incrustation —
There are four types of incrustation that reduce well pro-
duction: 1) chemical, 2) physical, 3) biological or 4) a combi-
nation of the other three processes. Chemical incrustation may
be caused by carbonates, oxides, hydroxides or sulfate deposi-
tions on or within the intake. Physical plugging of the wells is
caused by sediments plugging the intake and surrounding
formation. Biological incrustation is caused by bacteria growing
in the formation adjacent to the well intake or within the well.
The bacterial growth rate depends on the quantities of nutrients
available. The velocity at which the nutrients travel partially
controls nutrient availability. Examples of common bacteria
found in reducing conditions in wells include sulphur-splitting
and hydrocarbon-forming bacteria iron-fixing bacteria occur
in oxidizing conditions. Some biological contamination may
originate from the ground surface and be introduced into the
borehole during drilling. Nutrients for the organisms may also
be provided by some drilling fluids, additives or detergents.
Incrustation problems are most commonly caused by a
combination of chemical-physical, physical-biological or a
combination of chemical-physical-biological incrustations.
Particulate moving through the well intake may be cemented
by chemical/biological masses.
Downhole Maintenance
Many wells accumulate sediment at the bottom. Sand and
silt may penetrate the screen if the well is improperly developed
or screen openings improperly sized. Rocks dropped by rock
and bong technologists (Stewart, 1970), insects or waterlogged
twigs can also enter the well through casing from the surface.
Sediment can also be formed by precipitates caused by constitu-
ents within the water reacting with oxygen at the water surface
(National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement 1982).
If sediment build-up occurs, the sediment should be re-
moved. A sediment layer at the bottom of the well encourages
bacterial activity that can influence sample quality. In wells that
are less than 25 feet deep, sediment can be removed by a
centrifugal pump, and an intake hose can be used to "vacuum"
the bottom of a well. In wells deeper than 25 feet, a hose with
afoot valve can be used as a vacuum device to remove sediment.
In some situations, bailers can also be used to remove sediment.
Sediment should be removed before purging and sampling to
eliminate sample turbidity and associated questions about sample
validity.
More traditional maintenance/rehabilitation techniques
used to restore yields of water supply wells include chemical
and mechanical methods that are often combined for optimum
effectiveness. Three categones of chemicals are used in tradi-
tional well rehabilitation: 1) acids, 2) biocides and 3) surfac-
tant. The main objectives of chemical treatment are: 1) to
dissolve the incrustants deposited on the well intake or in the
surrounding formation, 2) to kill the bacteria in the well or
surrounding formation and 3) to disperse clay and fine materials
to allow removal. Table 42 lists typical chemicals and applica-
tions in the water supply industry. Chemicals have very limited
application in the rehabilitation of monitoring wells because the
chemicals cause severe changes in the environment of the wells.
These changes may last for a long time or may be permanent.
Before redevelopment with chemicals is considered, the nega-
tive aspects of chemical alteration in an existing well with a long
period of record must be evaluated against negative aspects of
replacing the old well with a new well that may have new
problems and no history. If chemical rehabilitation is at-
tempted, parameters such as Eh, pH, temperature and conduc-
tivity should be measured. These measurements can serve as
values for comparison of water quality before and after well
maintenance.
Mechanical rehabilitation includes: overpumping, surg-
ing, jetting and air development. These processes are the same
as those used in well development and are described in greater
detail in the section entitled "Methods of Well Development."
Development with air is not recommended because the intro-
duction of air can change the chemical environment in the well.
Any type of rehabilitation for incrustation can be supplemented
by use of a wire brush or mechanical scraper with bailing or
pumping to remove the loose particles from the well.
Exterior Well Maintenance
Maintenance must also be performed on the exposed parts
of the well. Any well casing; well cap, protective casing,
128
-------
Table 41. Regional Well Maintenance Problems (Gass et al., 1980)
Ground Water Regions
Most Prevalent
Aquifer Types
• Most Prevalent Well Problems
1, Western Mountain Ranges
2. Alluvial Basins
3. Columbia Lava Plateau
4. Colorado Plateau,
Wyoming Basin
5. High Plains
6. Unglaciated Central Region
7, Glaciated Central Region
8. Unglaciated Appalachians
9. Glaciated Appalachians
10. Atlantic and Gulf Coast Plain
Alluvial
Sandstone
Limestone
Alluvial
Basaltic lavas
Alluvial
interbedded sandstone
and shale
Alluvial
interbedded sandstone,
limestone, shale
Alluvial
Sandstone
Limestone
Alluvial
Sandstone
Metamorphic
Limestone
Alluvial
Alluvial
Consolidated sedimentary
Alluvial and semiconsolidated
Consolidated sedimentary
Silt, clay, sand intrusion, iron; scale deposition; biological fouling.
Fissure plugging; casing failure; sand production.
Fissure plugging by clay and silt; mineralization of fissures.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; scale deposition; iron; biological fouling;
limited recharge; casing failure.
Fissure and vesicle plugging by clay and silt; some scale deposition.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; iron; manganese; biological fouling.
Low initial yields; plugging of aquifer during construction by
drilling muds and fines (clay and silt) natural to formations; fissure
plugging; limited recharge; casing failure.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; scale deposition; iron; biological fouling;
limited recharge.
Low initial yield; plugging of voids and fissures; poor development
and construction; limited recharge.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; scale deposition; iron; biological fouling.
Fissure plugging by clay and silt; casing failure; corrosion: salt water
intrusion; sand production.
Fissure plugging by clay, silt, carbonate scale; saltwater intrusion.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; scale deposition; iron; biological fouling.
Fissure plugging; sand intrusion; casing failure.
Low initial yield; fissure plugging by silt and day; mineraliztion of fissures.
Predominantly cavernous production: fissure plugging by day and silt;
mineralization of fissures.
Clay, silt, fine sand intrusion; iron; scale; biological fouling.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; scale deposition; biological fouling; iron.
Fissure plugging; mineralization; low to medium initial yield.
Clay, silt, sand intrusion; mineralization of screens; biological fouling.
Mechanical and chemical fissure plugging; biological fouling; incrustation
of well intake structure.
.Excluding pumps and declining water table.
Table 42. Chemicals Used for Well Maintenance (Gass et cl., 1980)
Chemical Name Formula Application
Concentration
Acids and biocides
inhibitors
Hydrochloric acid
Sulfamic acid
Hydroxyacetic acid
Chlorine
Diethyithiourea
DOW A-73
Hydrated ferric sulfate
Aldec 97
Polyrad 110A
HCI
NHSO.H
C,H4°,
CI2
(C2H5)NCSN (C2HS)
Fe2(S04)3- 2-3H20
Carbonate scale, oxides, hydroxides
Carbonate scale, oxides, hydroxides
Biocide, chelating agent, weak scale
removal agent
Biocide, sterilization, very weak acid
Metal protection
Metal protection
For stainless steel
With sulfamic acid
Metal protection
15%; 2-3 times zone volume
15%; 2-3 times zone volume
50-500 ppm
0.2%
0.01%
1%
2%
.375%
Chelating agents
Wetting agents
Surfactant
Citric acid C6H.O7 Keeps metal ions in solution
Phosphoric acid H3PO Keeps metal ions in solution
Rochelle salt NaOOC (CHOH)2 COOK Keeps metal ions in solution
Hydroxyacetic acid C2H40., Keeps metal ions in solution
Plutonic F-68
Plutonic L-62
DOW F-33
Sodium Tripolyphosphate
Sodium Hexametaphosphate
Renders a surface non-repellent to a
wetting liquid
Renders a surface non-repellent to a
wetting liquid
Lowers surface tension of water thereby
increasing its cleaning power
129
-------
sampling tubing, bumper guard and/or surface seal should be
periodically inspected to ensure that monitoring well sample
quality will not be adversely affected. Suggested routine in-
spection and maintenance options should be considered:
1) Exposed well casing should be inspected. Well
casing should be of good structural integrity and
free of any cracks or corrosion;
2) The well cap should be removed to inspect for
spider webs, molds, fungi or other evidence of
problems that may affect the representativeness
of water samples. If no organisms and/or associated
evidence are found, the upper portion of the
casing should be cleaned with a long-handled
brush or other similar tool. The cleaning should
be scheduled after sample collection, and the well
should be completely purged after cleaning
(National Council of the Paper Industry for Air
and Stream Improvement, 1982);
3) When metal casing is used as protective casing
and a threaded cap is used, the casing should be
inspected for corrosion along the threads.
Corrosion can be reduced by lightly lubricating or
applying teflon tape to the threads to prevent
seizing. Corrosion of the casing can be reduced by
painting. If lubricants and/or paint are used, the
lubricants and/or paint should be prevented from
entering the well;
4) Where multilevel sampling tubes are used, the
tubes should rechecked for blockages and labeling
so that samples are collected from the intended
zones;
5) Where exterior bumper guards are used, the
bumperguards should be inspected for mechanical
soundness and periodically painted to retain
visibility; and
6) Surface seals should be inspected for settling and
cracking. When settling occurs, surface water can
collect around the casing. If cracking occurs or if
there is an improper seal, the water may migrate
into the well. Well seal integrity can best be
evaluated after a heavy rain or by adding water
around the outside of the casing. If the seal is
damaged, the seal should be replaced.
Comparative Costs of Maintenance
Evaluating the cost of rehabilitating a well versus abandon-
ing and redrilling the well is an important consideration. Factors
that should be evaluated are the construction quality of the
well, the accuracy of the well-intake placement and the preci-
sion of the documentation of the well. Capital costs of a new
well should also be considered. The actual "cost" of rehabilita-
tion is hard to calculate. Different rehabilitation programs may
be similar in technique and price but may produce very different
results. In some situations, different treatment techniques may
be necessary to effectively treat adjacent wells. Sometimes
techniques that once improved a well may only have a short-
term benefit or may no longer be effective. However, the cost
of not maintaining or rehabilitating a monitoring well maybe
very high. The money spent through the years on man-hours for
sample collection and laboratory sample analyses may be
wasted by the collection of unrepresentative data. Proper main-
tenance and rehabilitation in the long run is a good investment.
If rehabilitation is not successful, abandonment of the well
should be considered.
Well Abandonment
Introduction
Unplugged or improperly plugged abandoned wells pose a
serious threat to ground water. These wells serve as a pathway
for surface pollutants to infiltrate into the subsurface and
present an opportunity for various qualities of water to mix.
Currently, many sites are being monitored for low concentra-
tions of contaminants. As detection limits are lowered, it
becomes more important to have confidence in the monitoring
system. An improperly installed or maintained monitoring
network can produce anomalous sample results. Proper aban-
donment is crucial to the dependability of the remaining or new
installations.
The objectives of an abandonment procedure are to: 1)
eliminate physical hazards; 2) prevent ground-water contami-
nation, 3) conserve aquifer yield and hydrostatic head and 4)
prevent intermixing of subsurface water (United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 1975; American Water Works
Association, 1984). The purpose of sealing an abandoned well
is to prevent any further disturbance to the pre-existing
hydrogeologic conditions that exist within the subsurface. The
plug should prevent vertical movement within the borehole and
confine the water to the original zone of occurrence.
Many states have regulations specifying the approved
procedures for abandonment of water supply wells. Some states
require prior notification of abandonment actions and extensive
documentation of the actual abandonment procedures. How-
ever, few states have specific requirements for abandonment of
monitoring wells.
Well Abandonment Considerations
Selection of the appropriate method for abandonment is
based on the information that has been compiled for each well.
Factors that are considered include 1) casing material, 2)
casing condition, 3) diameter of the casing, 4) quality of the
original seal, 5) depth of the well, 6) well plumbness, 7)
hydrogeologic setting and 8) the level of contamination and the
zone or zones where contamination occurs. The type of casing
and associated tensile strength limit the pressure that can be
applied when pulling the casing or acting as a guide when
overdrilling. For example, PVC casing may break off below
grade during pulling. The condition of any type of casing also
may prohibit pulling. The diameter of the casing may limit the
technique that is selected. For example, hollow-stem augers
may not be effective for overdrilling large-diameter wells
because of the high torque required to turn large-diameter
augers. The quality of the original annular seal may also be a
determining factor. For example, if a poor seal was constructed,
then pulling the casing may be accomplished with minimum
effort. The depth of the well may limit the technique applied.
The plumbness of a well may influence technique by making
overdrilling or casing pulling more difficult. The hydrogeology
of the site may also influence the technique selected. For
example, hollow-stem augers may be used for overdrilling in
unconsolidated deposits but not in rock formations. The avail-
ability of a rig type and site conditions may also be determining
130
-------
factors. The level of contamination and zone in which contami-
nation occurs may modify the choice of technique. If no cross-
contamination can occur between various zones and contami-
nation cannot enter from the surface, grouting the well from
bottom to top without removing the casing maybe sufficient.
Well Abandonment Procedures
Well abandonment procedures involve filling the well with
grout. The well may be filled completely or seals placed in
appropriate zones and the well only partially filled with grout.
Completely filling the well minimizes the possibility of bore-
hole collapse and shifting of seals. The material used to fill the
well can be either carefully selected natural material with a
permeability that approximates the permeability of the natural
formation or a grout mixture with a lower permeability. If more
than one zone is present in the well, then either intermediate
seals must be used with natural materials or the well must be
grouted. Monitoring wells are most commonly abandoned by
completely filling the well with a grout mixture.
Wells can be abandoned either by removing the casing or
by leaving all or part of the casing in place and cutting the casing
off below ground level. Because the primary purpose of well
abandonment is to eliminate vertical fluid migration along the
borehole, the preferred method of abandonment involves cas-
ing removal. If the casing is removed and the borehole is
unstable, grout must be simultaneously emplaced as the casing
is removed in order to prevent borehole collapse and an inad-
equate seal. When the casing is removed, the borehole can be
sealed completely and them is less concern about channeling in
the annular space or inadequate casing/grout seals. However, if
the casing is left in place, the casing should be perforated and
completely pressure-grouted to reduce' the possibility of annu-
lar channeling. Perforating small-diameter casings in situ is
difficult, if not impossible.
Many different materials can be used to fill the borehole.
Bentonite, other clays, sand, gravel, concrete and neat cement
all may have application in certain abandonment situations.
Appendix C contains recommendations for well abandonment
that are provided by the American Water Works Association
(1984). These guidelines address the use of different materials
for falling the borehole indifferent situations. Regardless of the
type of material or combination of materials used for monitor-
ing well abandonment, the sealant must be free of contaminants
and must minimize chemical alteration of the natural ground-
water quality. For example, neat cement should not be used in
areas where the pH of the ground water is acidic. The ground
water will attack the cement and reduce the effectiveness of the
seal; the neat cement also raises the pH and alters ground-water
chemistry.
Procedures for Removing Casing —
If the well was not originally grouted, the casing maybe
pulled by hydraulic jacks or by "bumping" the casing with a rig.
A vibration hammer also may be used to speed up the task.
Casing cutters can be used to separate the drive shoe from the
bottom of the casing (Driscoll, 1986). If the well intake was
installed by telescoping, the intake may be removed by
sandlocking (United States Environmental Protection Agency,
1975).
A properly sized pulling pipe must, be used to successfully
implement the sandlocking technique. Burlap strips, 2 to 4
inches wide, and approximately 3 feet long are tied to the
pulling pipe. The pipe is lowered into the borehole to penetrate
approximately 2/3 of the length of the well intake. The upper
portion of the well intake above the burlap is slowly filled with
clean angular sand by washing the sand into the well, The
pulling pipe is then slowly lifted to create a locking effect.
Constant pressure is applied and increased until the well intake
begins to move. In some instances, jarring the pipe may assist
in well intake removal, but in some cases this action may result
in loss of the sand lock. As the well intake is extracted from the
well, the sand packing and pipe are removed. Many contractors
have developed variations of this sandlocking technique for
specific situations. For example, slots can be cut in the pulling
pipe at the level adjacent to the top of the well intake to allow
excess sand to exit through the pulling pipe. These slots prevent
the well intake from being overfilled and sandlocking the entire
drill sting. Slots can also be cut in the pipe just above the burlap
so that sand can be backwashes or bailed from the inside pipe
if the connection should need to be broken. Right and left-hand
couplings located between the drill pipe and pulling pipe may
be installed to disconnect the drill string if it becomes locked.
Well intakes that are 2 to 6 inches in diameter can be removed
by latch-type tools. For example, an elliptical plate cut in half
with a hinge may be used. The plate folds as it is placed in the
well and unfolds when lifted. If the well intake has a sump, the
tool can be locked under the sump; if there is no sump, the tool
can be locked under the well intake (Driscoll, 1986).
Another technique that may be used in conjunction with
sandlocking involves filling the borehole with a clay-based
drilling fluid through the pulling pipe while pulling the well
intake and casing from the bottom. The fluid prevents the
borehole from collapsing. The level of the fluid is observed to
determine if the borehole is collapsing. Fluid rises if collapse is
occurring. If fluid is falling, it is an indication that fluid is
infiltrating into the surrounding formation. In this technique,
the borehole is grouted from the bottom to the surface.
Overdrilling can also be used to remove casing from the
borehole. In overdrilling, a large-diameter hollow-stem auger
is used to drill around the casing. A large-diameter auger is used
because a larger auger is less likely to veer off the during during
drilling. The hollow stem should beat least 2 inches larger than
the casing that is being removed. For example, a 3 1/4-inch
inside-diameter auger should not be used to overdrill a 2-inch
diameter casing. The augers are used to drill to the full depth of
the previous boring. If possible, the casing should be pulled in
a "long" string, or in long increments. If the casing sticks or
breaks, jetting should be used to force water down the casing
and out the well intake. If this technique fails, the augers can be
removed one section at a time and the casing can be cut off in
the same incremental lengths. After all casing has been re-
moved, the hollow-stem augers are reinserted and rotated to the
bottom of the borehole. All the debris from the auger interior
should be cleaned out, the augers extracted and the borehole
filled with grout by using a tremie pipe (Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources, 1985). The technique of overdrilling is
not limited to hollow-stem augers. Overdrilling can also be
accomplished by direct rotary techniques using air, foam or
mud.
131
-------
Limiting factors in overdrilling are the diameter of the well
and the hydrogeology of the surrounding formation. When
overdrilling, an attempt should be made to remove all annular
sealant so a good seal can be obtained between the borehole wall
and the grout. The plumbness of the original installation is a! so
very important if the well was not installed plumb, then
overdrilling may be difficult.
A variation of overdrilling was used by Perrazo et al.
(1984) to remove 4-inch PVC casing from monitoring wells.
First, the well was filled with a thick bentonite slurry to prevent
the PVC cuttings from settling in the borehole. The auger was
regularly filled with slurry to keep the casing full and to form a
mudcake on the wall. This mudcake served as a temporary seal
until a permanent seal was installed. A hollow-stem auger was
used with a 5 to 10-foot section of NW rod welded onto the lead
auger for use as a guide in drilling out the PVC casing. The auger
was rotated, and the casing was cut and spiraled to the surface.
A 2-inch diameter roller bit was threaded onto a drill rod and
advanced to ensure the bottom area would be sealed to the
original depth. The grout mixture was pumped down the drill
stem and out the roller bit, displacing the bentonite slurry and
water to the surface. In wells where there was not sufficient
pressure to displace the bentonite slurry and standing water, the
roller bit and drill stem were removed, a pressure cap was
threaded onto the top auger flight and grout was pumped
through the cap until increasing pressure forced the grout to
displace the bentonite slurry and water. The augers were then
removed and the grout was alternately "topped off as each
flight was removed.
Another technique involves jetting casing out of the well
with water. If the casing sticks or breaks off, a small-diameter
fish tail-type bit is connected to an A-rod to drill out the
thermoplastic casing. The drilling fluid flushes the cuttings to
the surface. After the borehole is cleaned, a tremie pipe is used
to emplace grout from the bottom to the surface (Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, 1985).
Procedures for Abandonment Without
Casing Removal —
If the casing is in poor condition, the interval adjacent to the
water-bearing zones can be ripped or perforated with casing
rippers, and then the casing is filled and pressure grouted
(United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975; Driscoll,
1986). A concern when using this method is the accurate
placement and effectiveness of the cuts (Perazzo et al., 1984).
Casing may begun-perforated by using a device that fires steel
projectiles through the casing and into the formation. A jet-
perforating device may be used that is similar to the gun-
perforator except that a pre-shaped charge of high explosives is
used to bum holes through the casing (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
The top portion of the casing is then pulled so that a watertight
plug in the upper 15 to 20 feet can be attained. This step may be
omitted where the annular space was originally carefully grouted
(Driscoll, 1986).
Using Plugs —
Three types of bridge plugs can be used to isolate hydraulic
zones. These include: 1) permanent bridge seals, 2) intermedi-
ate seals and 3) seals at the uppermost aquifer. The permanent
bridge seal is the most deeply located seal that is used to form
a "bridge" upon which fill material can be placed. Permanent
bridge seals prevent cross-contamination between lower and
upper water-bearing zones. Permanent seals are comprised of
cement. Temporary bridges of neoprene plastic or other elas-
tomers can provide support for a permanent bridge during
installation (United States Environmental protection Agency,
1975).
Intermediate seals are located between water-bearing zones
to prevent intermixing of different-quality water. Intermediate
seals are comprised of cement, sand/cement or concrete mixes
and are placed adjacent to impermeable zones. The remaining
permeable zones are filled with clean disinfected sand, gravel
or other material (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 1975).
The seal at the uppermost aquifer is located directly above
the uppermost productive zone. The purpose is to seal out
surface water. An uppermost aquifer seal is typically comprised
of cement, sand/cement or concrete. In artesian conditions, this
seal prevents water from flowing to the surface or to shallower
formations (United States Environmental Protection Agency,
1975). This plugging technique is generally used to isolate
usable and non-usable zones and has been used extensively in
the oil and gas industry.
If artesian conditions are encountered, several techniques
can be used to abandon the well. To effectively plug an artesian
well, flow must be stopped and the water level lowered during
seal emplacement. The water level can be lowered by: 1)
drawing down the well by pumping nearby wells, 2) placing
fluids of high specific gravity in the borehole or 3) elevating the
casing high enough to stop the flow (Driscoll, 1986). If the rate
of flow is high, neat cement or sand/cement grout can be piped
under pressure, or a packer can be located at the bottom of the
confining formation above the production zone (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1975). Fast-setting cement
can sometimes be used in sealing artesian wells (Herndon and
Smith, 1984).
Grouting Procedures for Plugging
All materials used for grouting should be clean and stable;
water used should be free from oil and other contaminants
(Driscoll, 1986). Grout should be applied in one continuous
grouting procedure from bottom to top to prevent segregation,
dilution and bridging of the sealant. The end of the tremie pipe
should always remain immersed in the slurry of grout through-
out the emplacement procedure. Recommendations for grout
proportions and emplacement procedures are discussed in the
section entitled "Annular Seals."
Many states permit or recommend a cement/bentonite
mixture. The bentonite possesses swelling characteristics that
make it an excellent plugging material (Van Eck, 1978). The
grout mixture used should be compatible with soil and water
chemistry. For example, a salt-saturated cement should be used
for cementing in a salt-saturated area. The cement/bentonite
mixture should not extend through the vadose zone to the land
surface or be used in areas of low soil moisture because cracking
and channeling due to dessication can allow surface water to
infiltrate along the casing (Driscoll, 1986). To ensure that the
borehole was properly grouted, records should be kept of the
132
-------
calculated volume of the borehole and the volume of grout that
was used; any discrepancy should be explained.
A concrete cap should be placed on the top of a cement/
bentonite plug. The concrete cap should be marked with apiece
of metal or iron pipe and then covered by soil. The metal allows
for easy location of the well in the future by a metal detector or
magnetometer.
Clean-up, Documentation and Notification
After abandonment is accomplished, proper site clean-up
should be performed. For example, any pits should be back-
filled and the area should be left clean (Fairchild and Canter,
1984). Proper and accurate documentation of all procedures
and materials used should be recorded. If regulations require
that abandonment of wells be reported, information should be
provided on the required forms and in compliance with the state
regulations. Table 43 shows information that is typically recorded
on a well abandonment form. The location of abandoned wells
should be plotted on a map and referenced to section lines, lot
lines, nearby roads and buildings as well as any outstanding
geological features (Aller, 1984).
Table 43. Welll Abandonment Data (After Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, 1985)
Name of property owner
Address of owner/property
Well location (street, section number, township and range)
Type of well installation method and date (drilled, driven,
bored, dug), purpose of well (OW, PIEZ, LYS)
Depth of well
Diameter of well
Depth of casing
Depth to rock
Depth to water
Formation type
Material overlying rock (clay, sand, gravel, etc.)
Materials and quantities used to fill well in specific zones,
detailing in which formations and method used
Casing removed or left in place
Firm completing work
Signature of person doing work
Address of firm
References
Aller, Linda, 1984. Methods for determining the location of
abandoned wells; United States Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA-600/2-83-123, National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, 130 pp.
American Water Works Association, 1984. Appendix I:
Abandonment of test holes, partially completed wells and
completed wells American Water Works Association
Standard for Water Wells, American Water Works
Association, Denver, Colorado, pp. 45-47.
Barcelona, M.J., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich and E.E. Garske,
1985a. Practical guide for ground-water sampling; Illinois
State Water Survey, SWS Contract Report 374,
Champaign, Illinois, 93 pp.
Brownlee, Dorothy S., 1985. A step-by-step approach to
ground water contamination problems; Proceedings of the
Second Annual Eastern Regional Ground-Water
Conference, National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 1-24.
Connecticut Environmental Protection Agency, 1983. Ground-
water monitoring guidelines for hazardous waste
management facilities; Hazardous Materials Management
Unit and Water Compliance Unit, Hartford, Connecticut,
20pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Fairchild, Deborah M. and Larry W. Canter, 1984. Abandoned
wells and ground water Ground Water Age, vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 33-39.
Gass, Tyler E., Truman W. Bennett, James Miller and Robin
Miller, 1980. Manual of water well maintenance and
rehabilitation technology, National Water Well Association,
Dublin., Ohio, 247 pp.
Herndon, Joe and Dwight K. Smith, 1984. Setting down-hole
plugs a state-of-the-art proceedings of the First National
Conference on Abandoned Wells: Problems and Solutions,
University of Oklahoma, Environmental and Ground-Water
Institute, Norman., Oklahoma, pp. 227-250.
Ingersoll-Rand, 1985. Drilling terminology; Ingersoll-Rand
Rotary Drill Division, Garland, Texas, 125 pp.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement 1982. A guide to ground-water sampling;
Technical Bulletin no. 362, New York, New York, 22 pp.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Control, 1984.
Guidelines for design and construction of water-quality
monitoring wells; Program Plans Section, Water and Waste
Management Division, Lincoln, Nebraska, 11 pp.
Perazzo, James A., Richard C. Dorrler and James P. Mack,
1984. Long-term confidence in ground water monitoring
systems; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4, no. 4,
pp. 119-123.
Stewart David M., 1970. The rock and bong technique of
measuring water levels in wells; Ground Water, vol. 8, no.
6, pp. 14-18.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Manual
of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Supply,
EPA-570/9-75-001,156pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington,
D.C., OSWER-9950.1, 317 PP.
Van Eck, Orville J., 1978. Plugging procedures for domestic
wells; Public Information Circular Number 11, Iowa
Geological Survey, Des Moines, Iowa, 7 pp.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1985. Guidelines
for monitoring well installation, Appendix B; Bureau of
Solid Waste Management, Madison, Wisconsin, 35 pp.
133
-------
Master References
Aardvark Corporation, 1977. Product literature; Puyallup,
Washington, 2 pp.
Acker Drill Company, Inc., 1985. Soil sampling tools catalog;
Scranton, Pennsylvania, 17 pp.
Acker, W.L., 1974. Basic procedures for soil sampling and core
drilling; Acker Drill Company, Inc., Scranton,
Pennsylvania, 246 pp.
Ahrens, T.P., 1957. Well design criteria: part one; Water Well
Journal, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 13-30.
Ahrens, T.P., 1970. Basic considerations of well design: part
III; Water Well Journal, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 47-51.
Aller, Linda, 1984. Methods for determining the location of
abandoned wells; United States Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA-600/2-83- 123, National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, 130 pp.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1981. Standard
specification for thermoplastic water well casing pipe and
couplings made in standard dimension ratios (SDR): F-
480; 1987 Annual Book of American Society for Testing
Materials Standards, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp.
1028-1033.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1983. Standard
practice for thin-wall tube sampling of soil D1587; 1986
Annual Book of American Society for Testing and Materials
Standards, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 305-307.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1984. Standard
method for penetration test and split barrel sampling of
soils: D 1586; 1986 Annual Book of American Society for
Testing and Materials Standards, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, pp. 298-303.
American Society for Testing and Materials, 1986. Standard
specification for poly (vinyl chloride) (PVC) plastic pipe,
schedules 40, 80 and 120: D1785; 1987 Annual Book of
American Society for Testing Materials Standards,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 89-101.
American Water Works Association, 1984. Appendix I:
Abandonment of test holes, partially completed wells and
completed wells; American Water Works Association
Standard for Water Wells, American Water Works
Association, Denver, Colorado, pp. 45-47.
Anderson, D.C., K.W. Brown and J.W. Green, 1982. Effects of
organic fluids on the permeability of clay soil liners; Land
Disposal of Hazardous Waste: Proceedings of the 8th
Amua.l Research Sympsium, United States Environmental
Protection Agency Report # EPA-60W9-82-002, pp. 179-
191.
Anderson, M.P., 1984. Movement of contaminants in ground
water: ground water transport-advection and dispersion;
Ground-Water Contamination, Studies in Geophysics;
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 179 pp.
Andres, K.G. and R. Canace, 1984. Use of the electrical
Resistivity technique to delineate a hydrocarbon spill in the
coastal plain deposits of New Jersey; Proceedings of the
NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and
Organic Chemicals in Ground Water: Prevention, Detection
and Restoration: National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 188-197.
Barcelona, M.J., 1984. TOC determinations in ground water;
Ground Water, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 18-24.
Barcelona, M.J., G.K. George and M.R. Schock, 1988.
Comparison of water samples from PTFE, PVC and SS
monitoring wells; United States Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas,
EPA600/X-88t091,37pp.
Barcelona, MJ., J.P. Gibb, J.A. Helfrich and E.E. Garske,
1985a. practical guide for ground-water sampling;
Illinois State Water Survey, SWS Contract Report 374,
Champaign, Illinois, 93 pp.
Barcelona, MJ., J.P. Gibb and R. Miller, 1983. A guide to the
selection of materials for monitoring well construction and
ground-water sampling; Illinois State Water Survey, SWS
Contract Report 327, Champaign, Illinois, 78 pp.
Barcelona, MJ. and J.A. Helfrich, 1986. Well construction and
purging effects on ground-water samples; Environmental
Science & Technology, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1179-1184.
Barcelona, M.J. and J.A. Helfrich, 1988. Laboratory and field
studies of well-casing material effects; Proceedings of the
Ground Water Geochemistry Conference, National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 363-375.
Barcelona, Michael J., John A. Helfrich and Edward E. Garske,
1985b. Sampling tubing effects on ground-water samples;
Analytical Chemistry, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 460-464.
Bates, Robert L. and Julia A. Jackson, eds., 1987. Glossary of
geology; American Geological Institute, Alexandria,
Virginia, 788 pp.
Bear, J., 1972. Dynamics of fluids in porous media; Elsevier,
New York, 764 pp.
Beck, B.F., 1983. A common pitfall in the design of RCRA
ground-water monitoring programs; Ground Water, vol.
21, no. 4, pp. 488-489.
Blake, S.B. and R.A. Hall, 1984. Monitoring petroleum spills
with wells: some problems and solutions; Proceedings of
the Fourth National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration
and Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 305-310.
Boetmer, Edward A., Gwendolyn L. Ball, Zane Hollingsworth
and Rumulo Aquino, 1981. Organic and organotin
compounds leached from PVC and CPVC pipe; United
States Environmental Protection Agency Report # EPA-
60WI-81-062, 102pp.
Brobst, R.D. and P.M. Buszka, 1986. The effect of three drilling
fluids on ground-water sample chemistry; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 62-70.
Brown, K.W., J.W. Green, and J.C. Thomas, 1983. The influence
of selected organic liquids on the permeability of clay
liners; Land Disposal of Hazardous Waste: Proceedings of
the 9th Annual Research Symposium, United States
Environmental Protection Agency Report # EPA-600E-
83-018, pp. 114-125.
Brownlee, Dorothy S., 1985. A step-by-step approach to ground
water contamination problems; Proceedings of the Second
Annual Eastern Regional Ground-Water Conference,
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 1-24.
Bryden, G.W., W.R. Mabey and K.M. Robme, 1986. Sampling
for toxic contaminants in ground water; Ground-Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 67-72.
Buckeye Drill Company/Bucyrus Erie Company, 1982.
Buckeye drill operators manual; Zanesville, Ohio, 9 pp.
California Department of Health Services, 1986. The California
site mitigation decision tree manual; California Department
of Health Services, Sacramento, California, 375 pp.
134
-------
Campbell, M.D. and J.H. Lehr, 1973. Water Well Technology;
McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York,
681 pp.
Campbell, M.D. and J.H. Lehr, 1975. Well cementing; Water
Well Journal, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 39-42.
Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987. Catalog of product
literature; St. Louis, Missouri, 12 pp.
Cherry,J.A., R.W. GillhamandJ.F. Barker, 1984.Contaminants
in ground water: chemical processes; Ground-Water
Contamination, S tudies in Geophysics; National Academy
Press, Washington, D.C., 179 pp.
Connecticut Environmental Protection Agency, 1983. Ground
water monitoring guidelines for hazardous waste
management facilities; Hazardous Materials Management
Unit and Water Compliance Unit, Hartford, Connecticut,
20pp.
Curran, Carol M. and Mason B. Tomson, 1983. Leaching of
trace organics into water from five common plastics;
Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 68-71.
Dablow, JohnS. Ill, Grayson Walker and Daniel Persico, 1988.
Design considerations and installations techniques for
monitoring wells cased with Teflon® PTFE; Ground-
Water Contamination Field Methods, Collins and Johnson
editors, ASTM Publication Code Number 04-963000-38,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 199-205.
Deluca, R.J. and B.K. Buckley, 1985. Borehole logging to
delineate fractures in a contaminated bedrock aquifer;
Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water
Investigations; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 387-397.
Diedrich Drilling Equipment. 1986. Catalog of produciliterature;
LaPorte, Indiana, 106 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Dunbar, D., H. Tuchfeld, R. Siegel and R. Sterbentz, 1985.
Ground-water quality anomalies encountered during well
construction, sampling and analysis in the environs of a
hazardous waste management facility; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 70-74.
Electric Power Research Institute, 1985. Ground water manual
for the electric utility industry: groundwater investigations
and mitigation techniques, volume 3; Research Reports
Center, Palo Alto, California, 360 pp.
Everett, Lome G., 1980. Ground-water monitoring; General
Electric Company technology marketing operation,
Schenectady, New York, 440 pp.
Everett, L.G., L.G. Wilson and E.W. Hoylman, 1984. Vadose
zone monitoring for hazardous waste sites; Noyes Data
Corporation, Park Ridge, New Jersey, 360 pp.
Fairchild, Deborah M. and Larry W. Canter, 1984. Abandoned
wells and ground water; Ground Water Age, vol. 19, no. 3,
pp. 33-39.
Freeze, R. A. and J.A. Cherry, 1979. Ground Water; Prentice-
Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 604 pp.
Garber, M.S. and F.C. Koopman, 1968. Methods of measuring
water levels in deep wells; Techniques of Water-Resources
Investigations of the United States Geological Survey,
Book 8, Instrumentation; United States Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 23 pp.
Gass, Tyler E., 1984. Methodology for monitoring wells; Water
Well Journal, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 30-31.
Gass, Tyler E., 1986. Monitoring Well development; Water
Well Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 52-55.
Gass, Tyler E., Truman W. Bennett, James Miller and Robin
Miller, 1980. Manual of water well maintenance and
rehabilitation technology; National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, 247 pp.
Gibb, James P., 1987. How drilling fluids and grouting
materials affect the integrity of ground-water samples
from monitoring Wells, opinion I; Ground Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 33-35.
Gillham, R.W., 1982. Syringe devices for ground-water
sampling; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 2, no. 2,
pp. 36-39.
Gillharm, R. W., M.L. Robin, J.F. Barker and J.A. Cherry,
1983. Ground-water monitoring and sample bias; API
Publication 4367, Environmental Affairs Department,
American Petroleum Institute, Washington, D. C., 206 pp.
Gross, S., 1970. Modem plastics encyclopedia McGraw-Hill
Book Company, New York, New York, vol. 46, 1050 pp.
Guswa, J .H., 1984. Application of multi-phase flow theory at
a chemical waste landfill, Niagara Falls, New York;
Proceedings of the Second International Conference on
Ground-Water Quality Research; Oklahoma State
University Printing Services, Stillwater, Oklahoma, pp.
108-111.
Hackett, Glen, 1987. Drilling and constructing monitoring
wells with hollow-stem augers, part 1: drilling
considerations; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 7,
no. 4, pp. 51-62.
Hackett, Glen, 1988. Drilling and constructing monitoring
wells with hollow-stem augers, part II: monitoring well
installation; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 8, no.
1, pp. 60-68.
Hamilton, Hugh, 1985. Selection of materials in testing and
purifying water Ultra Pure Water, January/February
1985,3 pp.
Heath. R. C., 1984. Ground-water regions of the United States;
United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper
2242; Superintendent of Documents, United States
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 78 pp.
Helweg, Otto J., Verne H. Scott and Joseph C. Scalmanini,
1984. Improving well and pump efficiency; American
Water Works Association, 158 pp.
Hemdon, Joe and Dwight K. Smith, 1984. Setting down-hole
plugs: a state-of-the-art: Proceedings of the First National
Conference on Abandoned Wells: Problems and Solutions,
University of Olkahoma, Environmental and Ground-Water
Institute, Norman, Oklahoma, pp. 227-250.
Hinchee, R.E. and H.J. Rcisingcr, 1985. Multi-phase transport
of petroleum hydrocarbons in the subsurface environment:
theory and practical application; Proceedings of the
NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons
and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water: Prevention,
Detection and Restoration; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 58-76.
Huber, W. F., 1982. The u.se of downhole television in monitoring
applications; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water
Monitoring; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 285-286.
Hvorslev, M.J., 1949. Subsurface exploration and sampling of
soils for civil engineering purposes; United States Army
135
-------
Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi, 465 pp.
Ingersoll-Rand, 1976. The water well drilling equipment
selection guide; Ingersoll-Rand, Washington, New Jersey,
12pp.
Ingersoll-Rand, 1985. Drilling terminology; Ingersoll-Rand
Rotary Drill Division, Garland, Texas, 12.5 pp.
Johnson, Roy C., Jr., Carl E. Kurt and George F. Dunham, Jr.,
1980. Well grouting and casing temperature increases;
Ground Water, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 7-13.
Johnson Screens, Inc. 1988. Johnson well screens prices and
specifications; product literature, St. Paul, Minnesota, 20
pp.
Johnson, Thomas L, 1983. A comparison of well nests versus
single-well completions; Ground Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 76-78.
Junk, Gregor A., Harry J. Svec, Ray D. Vick and Michael J.
Avery, 1974. Contamination of water by synthetic
polymer tubes; Environmental Science and Technology,
vol. 8, no. 13, pp. 1100-1106.
Keely, J. F., 1986. Ground-water contamination assessments:
Ph.D. dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater,
Oklahoma, 408 pp.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987a. Monitoring well
installation, purging and sampling techniques part 1:
conceptualizations; Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 300-
313.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987b. Monitoring well
installation, purging, and sampling techniques part 2: case
histories; Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 427-439.
Keely, J.F. and C.F. Tsang, 1983. Velocity plots and capture
zones of pumping centers for ground-water investigations;
Ground Water, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 701-714.
Kerfoot, W.B., 1982. Comparison of 2-D and 3-D ground-
water flowmeter probes in fully penetrating monitoring
wells; Proceedings of the Second National Symposium
on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 264-
268.
Keys, W.S., 1968. Well logging in ground-water hydrology;
Ground Water, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 10-18.
Keys, W.S. and L.M. MacCary, 1971. Application of borehole
geophysics to water-resources investigations, Book 2;
United States Department of the Interior, Washington,
D.C., 126pp.
Kovski, J.R., 1984. Physical transport process for hydro-
carbons in the subsurfacce; Proceedings of the second
International Conference on Ground Water Quality
Research; Oklahoma State University Printing Services,
Stillwater, Oklahoma, pp. 127-128.
Krynine, Dimitri P. and William R, Judd, 1957. Principles of
engineering geology and geotechnics; McGraw-Hill, New
York, New York, 730 pp.
Kurt, C.E., 1983. Cement-based seals for thermoplastic water
well casings; Water Well Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 38-40.
Kurt, Carl E. and R.C. Johnson, Jr., 1982. Permeability of
grout seals surrounding thermoplastic well casing; Ground-
Water, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 415-419.
Kwader, T., 1985. Resistivity-porosity cross plots for
determining in-situ formation water-quality case
examples; Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on
Surface and Rorehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-
Water Investigations; National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 415424.
Layne-Western Company, Inc., 1983. Water, geological and
mineral exploration utilizing dual-wall reverse circulation;
Product literature, Mission, Kansas, 8 pp.
Leach, Lowell E., Frank P. Beck, John T. Wilson and Dan H.
Kampbell, 1988. Aseptic subsurface sampling technique
for hollow-stem auger drilling; Proceedings of the Second
National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer
Restoration, Ground-Water Monitoring and Geophysical
Methods, vol. I; National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 31-51.
Lerch, W. and C.L. Ford, 1948. Long-time study of cement
performance in concrete, chapter 3- chemical and physical
tests of the cements; Journal of the American Concrete
Institute, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 745-796.
Lindsey, G.P., 1985. Dry hole Resistivity logging; Proceedings
of the NWWA Conference on Surface and Borehole
Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water Investigations;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 371-
376.
Lithland, S.T., T.W. Hoskins andR.L. Boggess, 1985. Anew
ground-water survey tool: the combined cone penetrometer/
vadose zone vapor probe; Proceedings of the NWWA/API
Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic
Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection and
Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 322-330.
Mabey, W.R. and T. Mill, 1984. Chemical transformation in
ground water Proceedings of the Second International
Conference on Ground-Water Quality Research; Oklahoma
State University Printing Sendees, Stillwater, Oklahoma,
pp. 61-64.
Mackay, D. M., P.V. Roberts and J.A. Cherry, 1985. Transport
of organic contaminants in ground water Environmental
Science & Technology, vol. 19, 110.5, pp. 384-392.
Marrin, D.L. and G.M. Thompson, 1984. Remote detection of
volatile organic contaminants in ground water via shallow
soil gas sampling; Proceedings of the NWWA/API
Conference on Petroleum Hydrocarbons and Organic
Chemicals in Ground Water Prevention, Detection and
Restoration; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 172-187.
Marsh, J.M. and J. W. Lloyd, 1980. Details of hydrochemical
variations in flowing wells; Ground Water, vol. 18, no. 4,
pp. 366-373.
McCarty, P.L., M. Remhard and D.E. Rittmann, 1981. Trace
organics in ground water; Environmental Science &
Technology, vol. 15, no. l,pp. 40-51.
McCarty, P. L., B.E. Rittman and E.J. Douwer, 1984.
Microbiological processes affecting chemical
transformation in ground water Ground-Water Pollution
Microbiology, G. Britton and C.D. Gerba, editors, Wiley
and Sons, New York, pp. 90-115.
McCray, Kevin B., 1986. Results of survey of monitoring well
practices among ground water professionals; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 37-38.
Mickrun, J.T., B.S. Levy and G.W. Lex, 1984. Surface and
borehole geophysical methods in ground-water
investigations; Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4,
no. 4, pp. 167-171.
Miller, Gary D., 1982. Uptake and release of lead, chromium
136
-------
and trace level volatile organics exposed to synthetic well
casings; Proceedings of the Second National Symposiun.
on Aquifer-Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring,
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 236-
245.
Minning, Robert 6., 1982. Monitoring well design and,
installation; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water
Monitoring; Columbus, Ohio, pp. 194-197.
Moberly, Richard L., 1985. Equipment decontamination;
Ground Water Age, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 36-39.
Mobile Drilling Company, 1982. Auger tools and accessories
product literature; Indianapolis, Indiana, 26 pp.
Mobile Drilling Company, 1983. Mobile drill product catalog;
Indianapolis, Indiana, 37 pp.
Moehrl, Kenneth E., 1964. Well grouting and well protection;
Journal of the American Water Works Association, vol. 56,
no. 4, pp. 423-431.
Molz, F.J. and C.E. Kurt, 1979. Grout-induced temperature rise
surrounding wells; Ground Water, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 264-
269.
Morahan, T. and R.C. Doorier, 1984. The application of
television borehole logging to ground-water monitoring
programs; Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4, no.
4, pp. 172-175.
Morrison, R. D., 1984. Ground-water monitoring technology,
procedures, equipment and applications; Timco
Manufacturing, Inc., Prairie Du Sac, Wisconsin, 111 pp.
Nass, L. I., 1976. Encyclopedia of PVC; vols. I and II, Marcel
Dekker, New York, 1249 pp.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement, 1981. Ground-water quality monitoring well
construction and placement; Stream Improvement
Technical Bulletin Number 342, New York, New York,
39 pp.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream
Improvement, 1982. A guide to ground-water sampling;
Technical Bulletin no. 362, New York, New York, 22 pp.
National Sanitation Foundation, 1988. National Sanitation
Foundation Standard 14, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 65 pp.
National Water Well Association and Plastic Pipe Institute,
1981, Manual on the selection and installation of
thermoplastic water well casing; National Water Well
Association, Worthington, Ohio, 64 pp.
National Water Well Association of Australia, 1984. Drillers
training and reference manual; National Water Well
Association of Australia, St. Ives, South Wales, 267 pp.
Nebraska Department of Environmental Control, 1984.
Guidelines for design and construction of water quality
monitoring wells; Program Plans Section, Water and
Waste Management Division, Lincoln, Nebraska, 11 pp.
Nielsen, D.M. amd G.L. Yeates, 1985. A comparison of
sampling mechanisms available for small-diameter ground-
water monitoring wells; Proceedings of the Fifth National
Symposium and Exposition on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 237-270.
Noel, M.R., R.C. Benson and P.M. Beam, 1983. Advances in
mapping organic contamination: alternative solutions to a
complex problem; National Conference on Managing
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, Washington, D.C.;
Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute, Silver
Spring, Maryland, pp. 71-75.
Norman, W.R., 1986. An effective and inexpensive gas-drive
ground-water sampling device; Ground-Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 56-60.
Norton Performance Plastics, 1985. Chemware high
performance laboratory products, C-102; product literature,
Wayne, New Jersey, 18 pp.
Office of Technology Assessment, 1984. Protecting the
nation's ground water from contamination, vols. I and 11;
United States Congress, Washington, D.C., 503 pp.
Parker, Louise V. and Thomas F. Jenkins, 1986. Suitability of
polyvinyl chloride well casings for monitoring munitions
in ground water; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol.
6, no. 3, pp. 92-98.
Perazzo, James A., Richard C. Dorrler and James P. Hack,
1984. Long-term confidence in ground water monitoring
systems; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4, no. 4,
pp. 119-123.
Perry, Charles A. and Robert J. Hart, 1985. Installation of
observation wells on hazardous waste site in Kansas using
a hollow-stem auger; Ground Water Monitoring Review,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 70-73.
Petroleum Extension Service, 1980. Principles of Drilling
Fluid Control; Petroleum Extension Service, University
of Texas, Austin, Texas, 215 pp.
Pettyjohn, W. A., 1976. Monitoring cyclic fluctuations in
ground-water quality; Ground Water, vol. 14, no. 6. pp.
472479.
Pettyjohn, W. A., 1982. Cause and effect of cyclic changes in
ground-water quality; Ground-Water Monitoing Review,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 43-49.
Pickens, J.F., J.A. Cherry, R. M. Coupland, G.E. Grisak, W.F.
Merritt and B. A, Risto, 1981. A multilevel device for
ground-water sampling Ground Water Monitoring Review,
vol. l,no. l,pp. 48-51.
Purdin, Wayne, 1980. Using nonmetallic casing for geothermal
wells; Water Well Journal, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 90-91.
Ramsey, Robert J., James M. Montgomery and George E.
Maddox, 1982. Monitoring ground-water contamination
in Spokane County, Washington; Proceedings of the
Second National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground Water Monitoring, National Water Well
Association, Worthington, Ohio, pp. 198-204.
Rehtlane, Erik A. and Franklin D. Patton, 1982. Multiple port
piezometers vs. standpipe piezometers: an economic
comparison; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water
Monitoring, National Water Well Association,
Worthington, Ohio, pp. 287-295.
Reinhwd, M., J.W. Gray don, N.L. Goodman and J.F. Barker,
1984. The distribution of selected trace organics in the
leachate plume of a municipal landfill; Proceedings of the
Second International Conference on Ground-Water
Quality Research; Oklahoma State University Printing
Services, Stillwater, Oklahoma, pp. 69-71.
Reynolds, G.W. and Robert W. Gillham, 1985. Absorption of
halogenated organic compounds by polymer materials
commonly used in ground water monitors; Proceedings of
the Second Canadian/American Conference on
Hydrogeology, National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 125-132.
Richter, Henry R. and Michael G. Collentine, 1983. Will my
137
-------
monitoring wells survive down there?: design and
installation techniques for hazardous waste studies;
Proceedings of the Third National Symposium on Aquifer
Restoration and Ground Water Monitoring, Columbus,
Ohio, pp. 223-229.
Riggs, Charles O., 1983. Soil sampling in the vadose zone;
Proceedings of the NWWA/U.S. EPA Conference on
Characterization and Monitoring of the Vadose
(Unsaturated) Zone, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 611-622.
Riggs, Charles O., 1986. Exploration for deep foundation
analyses; proceedings of the International Conference on
Deep Foundations, Beijing, China, volume H, China
Building Industry Press, Beijing, China, pp. 146-161.
Riggs, Charles O., 1987. Drilling methods and installation
technology for RCRA monitoring wells; RCRA Ground
Water Monitoring Enforcement Use of the TEGD and
COG, RCRA Enforcement Division, Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement, United States Environmental
Protection Agency, pp. 13-39,
Riggs, Charles 0. and Allen W. Hatheway, 1988. Groundwater
monitoring field practice - an overview; Ground-Water
Contamination Field Methods, Collins and Johnson
editors, ASTM Publication Code Number 04-963000-38,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 121-136.
Ritchey, J. D., 1986. Electronic sensing device used for in-situ
ground-water monitoring; Ground-Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 108-113.
Robin, M.J., D.J. Dytynshyn and S.J. Sweeny, 1982. Two
gas-drive sampling devices; Ground-Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 63-65.
Sanders, P.J., 1984. New tape for ground-water measurements;
Ground-Water Monitoring Review, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 39-
42.
Saunders, W.R. and R.M. Germeroth, 1985. Electromagnetic
measurements for subsurface hydrocarbon investigations;
Proceedings of the NWWA/API Conference on Petroleum
.Hydrocarbons and Organic Chemicals in Ground Water:
Prevention, Detection and Restoration; National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 310-321.
Scalf, M.R., J.F. McNabb, W.J. Dunlap, R.L. Cosby and J,
Fryberger, 1981. Manual of ground-water quality sampling
procedures, National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, 93 pp.
Schalla, Ronald and Robert W. Landick, 1986. A new valved
and air-vented surge plunger for developing small-diameter
monitor wells; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 6,
no. 2, pp. 77-80.
Schmidt, Kenneth D., 1986. Monitoring well drilling and
sampling in alluvial basins in arid lands; Proceedings of the
Conference on Southwestern Ground Water Issues, Tempe,
Arizona, National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio,
pp. 443-455.
Schwarzenbach, R.P. and W. Giger, 1985. Behavior and fate
of halogenated hydrocarbons in ground water; Ground-
Water Quality, C.H. Ward, W. Giger and P.L, McCarty,
editors; Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 446471.
Schwille, F., 1981. Ground-water pollution in porous media by
fluids immiscible with water Quality of Ground Water,
Proceedings of an International Symposium,
Noordwikeshout, The Netherlands; Studies in
Environmental Science, vol. 17, Elsevier Scientific
Company. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1128 pp.
Senger, J.A., 1985. Defining glacial stratigraphy with the
neutron log; Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on
Surface and Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-
Water Investigations; National Water Well Association,
Dublin, Ohio, pp. 355-368.
Sosebee, J.B,, P.C. Geiszler, D.L. Winegardner and C.R.
Fisher, 1983. Contamination of ground-water samples
with PVC adhesives and PVC primer from monitor
wells; Proceedings of the ASTM Second Symposium on
Hazardous and Industrial Solid Waste Testing, ASTM STP
805, R.A. Conway and W.P. Gulledge, eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, pp. 38-50.
Speedstar Division of Koehring Company, 1983. Well drilling
manual: National Water Well Association., Dublin, Ohio,
72pp.
Stewart, David M., 1970. The rock and bong technique of
measuring water level in wells; Ground Water, vol. 8, no.
6, pp. 14-18.
Taylor, K.C., S.G. Wheatcraft and L.G. McMillion, 1985. A
strategy for hydrologic interpretation of well logs;
Proceedings of the NWWA Conference on Surface and
Borehole Geophysical Methods in Ground-Water
Investigations; National Water Well Association, Dublin,
Ohio, pp. 314-323.
Timco Manufacturing Company, Inc., 1982. Geotechnical
Products; product literature, Prairie Du Sac, Wisconsin,
24pp.
Tomson, M.B., S.R. Hutchins, J.M. King and C.H. Ward,
1979. Trace organic contamination of ground water:
methods for study and preliminary results; HI World
Congress on Water Resources, Mexico City, Mexico, vol.
8, pp. 3701-3709.
Troxell, G. E., H.E. Davis and J.W. Kelly, 1968. Composition
and properties of concrete; McGraw-Hill Book Company,
New York, New York, 529 pp.
United States Department of Interior, 1974. Earth manual, a
water resources technical publication; Bureau of
Reclamation, United States Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C., 810 pp.
United States Environmental protection Agency, 1975. Manual
of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental protection Agency, Office of Water
Supply, EPA-570/9-75-001, 156 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1984.
Standard operating safety guide; United States
Environmental protection Agency Office of Emergency
Response, United States Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC., 166 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER-
9950.1, United States Environmental Protection Agency,
317pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. A
compendium of Superfund field operations methods;
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Publication No. 540/P-87/001, 644 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. Test
methods for evaluating solid waste, physical/chemical
methods (SW-846); Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
138
-------
Response, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.,
519pp.
Urban, T.C. and W.H. Diment, 1985. Convection in boreholes:
limits on interpretation of temperature logs and methods
for determining anomalous fluid flow; Proceedings of the
NWWA Conference on Surface and Borehole Geophysical
Methods in Ground-Water Investigations; National Water
Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 399-414.
Van Eck, Orville J., 1978. Plugging procedures for domestic
wells; Public Information Circular Number 11, Iowa
Geological Survey, Des Moines, Iowa, 7 pp.
Verbeck, G.J. and C.W. Foster, 1950. Long-time study of
cement performance in concrete with special reference to
heats of hydration; American Society for Testing and
Materials Proceedings, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp.
1235-1262.
Villaume, J.F., 1985. Investigations at sites contaminated with
dense, non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs); Ground-
Water Monitoring Review, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 60-74.
Voytek, J. Jr., 1982. Application of downhole geophysical
methods in ground-water monitoring; Proceedings of the
Second National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground-Water Monitoring; National Water Well
Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 276-278.
Walker, William H., 1974. Tube wells, open wells, and
optimum ground-water resource development; Ground
Water, vol. 12, no. l,pp. 10-15.
Wehran Engineering Corporation, 1977. Procedures manual
for ground water monitoring at solid waste disposal facilities
(SW-611); National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Virginia, 269 pp.
Wehrmann, H. Allen, 1983. Monitoring well design and
construction; Ground Water Age, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 35-38.
Williams, Ernest B., 1981. Fundamental concepts of well
design; Ground Water, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 527-542.
Williamson, D.A., 1984. Unified classification system; Bulletin
of Engineering Geologists, vol. 21, no. 3, The Association
of Engineering Geologists, Lawrence, Kansas, pp. 345-
354.
Wilson, J.T., M.J. Noonan and J.F. McNabb, 1985.
Biodegradation of contaminants in the subsurface;
Ground-Water Quality, C.H. Ward, W. Giger and P.L.
McCarty, editors; John Wiley and Sons, New York, 547
pp.
Wilson, L.G., 1980. Monitoring in the vadose zone: a review of
technical elements and methods; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Publication No. 600/7-80-134, 168 pp.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 1985. Guidelines
for monitoring well installation, Appendix B; Bureau of
Solid Waste Management Madison, Wisconsin, 35 pp.
Yaniga, P.M. and J.G. Warburton, 1984. Discrimination
between real and apparent accumulation of immiscible
hydroca.rbons on the water table; a theoretical and empirical
analysis Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium
on Aquifer Restoration and Ground-Water Monitoring;
National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 311-
315.
Zapico, Michael M., Samuel Vales and John A. Cherry, 1987.
A wireline piston core barrel for sampling cohesionless
sand and gravel below the water table; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 74-82.
139
-------
Appendix A
Drilling and Constructing Monitoring Wells With
Hollow-Stem Augers
[This report was produced as a part of this cooperative agreement
and was published by Hackett (1987 and 1988).]
Introduction
Since the 1950's, hollow-stem augers have been used
extensively by engineers and exploration drillers as a practical
method of drilling a borehole for soil investigations and other
Geotechnical work. The widespread use and availability of
hollow-stem augers for Geotechnical investigations has re-
sulted in the adaptation of this method to drilling and installing
ground-water monitoring wells. To date, hollow-stem augers
represent the most widely used drilling method among ground-
water professionals involved in constructing monitoring wells
(McCray, 1986). Riggs and Hatheway (1988) estimate that
more than 90 percent of all monitoring wells installed in
unconsolidated materials in North America are constructed by
using hollow-stem augers.
The drilling procedures used when constructing monitor-
ing wells with hollow-stem augers, however, are neither stan-
dardized nor thoroughly documented in the published litera-
ture. Lack of standardization is partially due to variable
hydrogeologic conditions which significantly influence hol-
low-stem auger drilling techniques and monitoring well con-
struction practices. Many of these construction practices evolved
in response to site-specific drilling problems which are unique
to hollow-stem augers.
This report presents an objective discussion of hollow-
stem auger drilling and monitoring well construction practices.
The drilling equipment will be reviewed, and the advantages
and limitations of the method for drilling and installing moni-
toring wells will be presented.
Auger Equipment
The equipment used for hollow-stem auger drilling in-
cludes either a mechanically or hydraulically powered drill rig
which simultaneously rotates and axially advances a hollow-
stem auger column. Auger drills are typically mounted on a
self-contained vehicle that permits rapid mobilization of the
auger drill from borehole to borehole. Trucks are frequently
used as the transport vehicle; however, auger drills may also be
mounted on all-terrain vehicles, crawler tractors or tracked
carriers (Mobile'Drilling Company, 1983). These drilling rigs
often have multi-purpose auger-core-rotary drills which have
been designed for Geotechnical work. Multi purpose rigs may
have: 1) adequate power to rotate, advance and retract hollow-
stem augers; 2) adequate drilling fluid pumping and tool hoisting
capability for rotary drilling; and 3) adequate rotary velocity,
spindle stability and spindle feed control for core drilling
(Riggs, 1986).
The continuously open axial stem of the hollow-stem auger
column enables the borehole to be drilled while the auger
column simultaneously serves as a temporary casing to prevent
possible collapse of the borehole wall. Figure 1 shows the
typical components of a hollow-stem auger column. The lead
end of the auger column is fitted with an auger head (i.e., cutter
head) that contains replaceable teeth or blades which breakup
formation materials during drilling. The cuttings are carried
upward by the flights which are welded onto the hollow stem.
A pilot assembly, which is commonly comprised of a solid
center plug and pilot bit (i.e., center head), is inserted within the
hollow center of the auger head (Figure 1). The purpose of the
center plug is to prevent formation materials from entering the
Drive Cap
Center Plug
Pilot Assembly
Components
Pilot Bit
Rod to Cap
Adapter
Auger Connector
Hollow Stem
Auger Section
Center Rod
Auger Connector
Auger Head
Replaceable
Carbide Insert
Auger Tooth
Figure 1. Typical components of a hollow-stem auger column
(after Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987).
141
-------
hollow stem of the lead auger, and the pilot bit assists in
advancing the auger column during drilling, A center rod,
which is attached to the pilot assembly, passes through the
hollow axis of the auger column. Once the borehole is advanced
to a desired depth for either sampling the formation or installing
the monitoring well, the center rod is used to remove the pilot
assembly. After a sample of the formation has been collected,
the center rod is used to reinsert the pilot assembly into the
auger head prior to continued drilling. The top of the center rod
is attached to a drive cap (Figure 1). The drive cap is used to
connect the auger column to the spindle of the drill rig. This
"double adapter" drive cap ensures that the center rod and pilot
assembly rotate along with the auger column.
The auger column is comprised of a series of individual
hollow auger sections which are typically 5 feet in length.
These individual 5-foot auger sections are joined together by
either slip-fit keyed box and pin connections, slip-fit box and
pin connections or threaded connections (Figure 2). The major-
ity of hollow-stem augers have keyed, box and pin connections
for transfer of drilling torque through the coupling and for easy
coupling and uncoupling of the auger sections (Riggs, 1987).
Box and pin connection of the connections use an auger bolt to
prevent the individual auger sections from slipping apart when
the auger column is axially retracted from a borehole (Figures
2a and 2b). Where contaminants area concern at the drilling
site, an o-ring may be used on the pin end of the connection to
minimize the possible inflow of contaminants through the joint.
Joints with o-rings will leak as the o-rings become worn and it
is difficult to assess the degree of wear at each joint in the auger
column when drilling. Augers with watertight threaded connec-
tions are available; however, these threaded connections
commonly are used with commercial lubricants which may
contain hydrocarbon or metallic based compounds. When
threaded hollow-stem augers are used for the installation of
water-quality monitoring wells, the manufacturer recommends
that no lubricants be used on the threads (H.E. Davis, Vice
President Mobile Drilling Pacific Division, personal communi-
cation, 1987). When lubricants are used on the hollow-stem
auger threads, a nonreactive lubricant, such as a fluorinated
based grease, may be used to avoid introducing potential
contaminants that may affect the ground-water samples col-
lected from the completed well.
The dimensions of hollow-stem auger sections and the
corresponding auger head used with each lead auger section are
not standardized between the various auger manufacturers. A
typical range of hollow-stem auger sizes with slip-fit, box and
pin connections is shown in Table 1, and the range of hollow-
stem auger sizes with threaded connections is shown in Table
2. Hollow-stem auger diameters are typically referenced by the
inside versus the outside (i.e., flighting) diameter. All refer-
ences made to the diameter of the hollow-stem auger in this
report will refer to the inside diameter, unless stated otherwise.
Tables 1 and 2 also list the cutting diameter of the auger heads
which are mounted on the lead augers. Common diameters of
hollow-stem augers used for monitoring well construction
range from 3 1/4 to 8 1/4 inches for slip-fit, box and pin
connected augers and 3 3/8 to 6 inches for threaded augers.
The hollow axis of the auger column facilitates the collec-
tion of samples of unconsolidated formations, particularly in
unsaturated cohesive materials. Two types of standard sam-
Key Way
Auger Bolt
. O-Ring
a. Keyed, Box and Pin Connection
Auger Bolt
Pin End
b. Box and Pin Connection
c. Threaded Connection
Figure 2. Three common methods for connecting hollow-stem
auger sections.
142
-------
Table 1. Typical Hollow-Stem Auger Sizes with Slip-Fit, Box and Pin Connections (from Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987)
Hollow-Stem
Inside Diameter (In.)
Flighting Diameter
(in.)'
Auger Head
Cutting Diameter (in.)
2114
2314
3114
33/4
4114
6114
8114
55/8
6118
65/8
7118
7518
95/8
11 5/8
61/4
6314
7114
7314
81/4
10114
12112
.NOTE: Auger flighting diameters should be considered minimum manufacturing dimensions.
Table 2. Hollow-Stem Auger Size with Threaded Connections (from Mobile Drilling Company, 1982)
Hollow-Stem
Inside Diameter (in.)
Flighting Diameter
(in.)"
Auger Head
Cutting Diameter (In.)
21/2
3318
4
6114
8114
81/2
11
8
9
11
13114
" NOTE: Auger flighting diameters should be considered minimum manufacturing dimensions.
piers which are used with hollow-stem augers are split barrel
and thin-walled tube samplers.
Split-barrel samplers are typically driven 18 to 24 inches
beyond the auger head into the formation by a hammer drop
system. The split-barrel sampler is used to collect a represen-
tative sample of the formation and to measure the resistance of
the formation to penetration by the sampler. The samples are
used for field identification of formation characteristics and
may also be used for laboratory testing. Thin-walled tube
samplers may be advanced a variable length beyond the auger
head either by pushing or driving the sampler into the format-
ion. These samplers are designed to recover relatively un-
disturbed samples of the formation which are commonly used
for laboratory testing. Standard practices for using split-barrel
samplers and thin-wall tube samplers are established under
ASTM Standards Dl586-84 and Dl587-83, respectively. The
ability of hollow-stem augers to accommodate these samplers,
and thus to permit the collection of undisturbed samples of the
formation, is often cited as a major advantage of the hollow-
stem auger method of drilling (Minning, 1982; Richter and
Collecting, 1983; Gass, 1984).
In addition to these standard samplers, continuous sam-
pling tube systems are commercially available which permit the
collection of unconsolidated formation samples as the auger
column is rotated and axially advanced (Mobile Drilling Com-
pany, 1983; Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987). Con-
tinuous sampling tube systems typically use a 5-foot barrel
sampler which is inserted through the auger head. The barrel
sampler replaces the traditional pilot assembly during drilling;
however, the sampler does not rotate with the augers. The open
end of the sampler extends a short but adjustable distance
beyond the auger head, and this arrangement allows sampling
to occur simultaneously with the advancement of the auger
column. After the auger column has advanced a distance up to
5 feet, the loaded sampler is retracted from the auger column.
The loaded sampler is either immediately emptied and rein-
serted through the auger head or exchanged for another empty
sampler. Multi-purpose drill rigs that are capable of core
drilling can also use core barrels for coring either unconsoli-
dated material or rock.
Borehole Drilling
There are several aspects of advancing a borehole with
hollow-stem augers that are important considerations for ground-
water monitoring. For clarity and continuity, the topic of
drilling a borehole with hollow-stem augers will be presented
under three subheadings: 1) general drilling considerations; 2)
drilling with hollow-stem augers in the unsaturated and satu-
rated zones; and 3) potential vertical movement of contami-
nants within the borehole.
General Drilling Considerations
When drilling with hollow-stem augers, the borehole is
drilled by simultaneously rotating and axially advancing the
auger column into unconsolidated materials or soft, poorly
consolidated formations. The cutting teeth on the auger head
break up the formation materials, and the rotating auger flights
convey the cuttings upward to the surface. In unconsolidated
materials, hollow-stem auger drilling can be relatively fast, and
several hundred feet of borehole advancement per day is
possible (Keely and Boateng, 1987a). Drilling may be much
slower, however, in dense unconsoldiated materials and in
coarse materials comprised primarily of cobbles. A major
limitation of the drilling method is that the augers cannot be
used to drill through consolidated rock. In unconsolidated
deposits with boulders, the boulders may also cause refusal of
the auger column. According to Keely and Boateng (1978a),
this problem may be overcome in sediments with cobbles by
removing the pilot assembly from the auger head and replacing
the assembly with a small tri-cone bit. It is then possible to drill
through the larger cobbles by limited rotary drilling, without the
use of drilling fluids.
The depths to which a borehole may be advanced with a
hollow-stem auger depend on the site hydrogeology (i.e., den-
143
-------
sity of the materials penetrated and depth to water) and on the
available power at the spindle of the drill rig. Riggs and
Hatheway (1988) state that, as a general rule, the typical maxi-
mum drilling depth, in feet, with 3 1/4-inch to 4 1/4-inch
diameter hollow-stem augers, is equivalent to the available
horsepower at the drill spindle, multiplied by a factor of 1.5.
This general rule on maximum drilling depths may be influ-
enced by the types of formations being drilled. Hollow-stem
augers have been used to advance boreholes to depths greater
than 300 feet; however, more common depths of borehole
advancement are 75 to 150 feet (Riggs and Hatheway, 1988).
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (1986)
generally recognizes 150 feet as the maximum drilling depth
capability of hollow-stem augers in unconsolidated materials.
One significant advantage of using hollow-stem augers for
ground-water monitoring applications is that the drilling method
generally does not require the circulation of drilling fluid in the
borehole (Scalf et al, 1981; Richter and Colletme, 1983). By
eliminating or minimizing the use of drilling fluids, hollow-
stem auger drilling may alleviate concerns regarding the poten-
tial impact that these fluids may have on the quality of ground-
water samples collected from a completed monitoring well.
Without the use of drilling fluids, the drill cuttings may also be
more easily controlled. This is particularly important where the
cuttings are contaminated and must be contained for protection
of the drilling crew and for disposal. In addition, subsurface
contaminants encountered during the drilling process are not
continuously circulated throughout the borehole via a drilling
fluid.
The potential for formation damage from the augers (i.e.,
the reduction of the hydraulic conductivity of the materials
adjacent to the borehole) varies with the type of materials being
drilled. In homogeous sands and gravels, hollow-stem auger
drilling may cause minimal damage to the formation. Where
finer-grained deposits occur, however, smearing of silts and
clays along the borehole wall is common. Keely and Boateng
(1987a) indicate that interstratified clays and silts can be
smeared into coarser sand and gravel deposits and can thereby
alter the contribution of ground-water flow from various strata
to the completed monitoring well. Smearing of silts and clays
along the borehole wall may also be aggravated by certain
drilling practices that are designed to ream the borehole to
prevent binding of the auger column (Keely and Boateng,
1987a). These reaming techniques, which may be used after
each few feet of borehole advancement, include either rotating
the auger column in a stationary position or rotating the auger
column while the column is alternately retracted and advanced
over a short distance in the borehole.
The diameter of the borehole drilled by hollow-stem au-
gers is influenced by the outside diameter of the auger head and
auger flighting, the type of formation material being drilled and
the rotation of the augers. As shown in Tables 1 and 2, the
cutting diameter of the auger head is slightly larger than the
corresponding outside diameter of the flighting on the hollow-
stem auger. The cutting diameter of the auger head will there-
fore initially determine the diameter of the borehole. However,
as the cuttings are conveyed up the flights during drilling, the
diameter of the borehole may also be influenced by the packing
of the cuttings on the borehole wall. Cuttings from cohesive
formation materials with silts and clays may easily compact
along the borehole wall, whereas noncohesive sands and
gravels may not. Where cuttings are readily compacted on the
sidewalls, the borehole diameter may reflect the outside diam-
eter of the auger flights as opposed to the cutting diameter of the
auger head. In noncohesive materials, the borehole diameter
may be enlarged due to caving of the side walls. In addition,
reaming techniques used to prevent binding of the auger column
in the borehole often serve to enlarge the diameter of the
borehole beyond the outside diameter of the the auger flights.
The diameter of the borehole may also be influenced by the
eccentric rotation of the augers which do not always rotate
about a vertical axis. As a result of these factors, the borehole
diameter may be variable over the length of the borehole.
Drilling with Hollow-Stem Augers in the
Unsaturated and Saturated Zones
The drilling practices used to advance a borehole with
hollow-stem augers in saturated materials and unsaturated
materials are usually the same when drilling in finer-grained
deposits or compacted sands and gravels. However, certain
lossely compacted saturated sands, known as "heaving sands"
or "sandblows," may pose a particular drilling difficulty
(Minning, 1982; Perry and Hart, 1985; Keely and Boateng,
1987a). Heaving sands can necessitate changes in basic drilling
equipment and changes in drilling practices. The following
discussion focuses first on the drilling procedures used to
advance a borehole through the unsaturated zone. These
procedures are then contrasted with the drilling techniques used
to advance the auger column into saturated heaving sands.
Unsaturated Zones —
When drilling in the unsaturated zone, the hollow-stem
auger column is typically comprised of the components shown
in Figure 1. A pilot assembly, center rod and drive cap
commonly are used, and the borehole is advanced without the
use of a drilling fluid. When the borehole has been advanced to
a desired sampling depth, the drive cap is detached from the
auger column, and the center rod and pilot assembly are
removed from the hollow axis of the auger column (Figures 3 a
and 3b). A split barrel sampler or thin-walled tube sampler,
attached to a sampling rod, is then lowered through the axis of
the hollow-stem column. The sampler is advanced beyond the
auger head either by driving or pressing the sampler into the
formation materials (Figure 3c). The loaded sampler and sam-
pling rod are removed from the auger column, and the pilot
assembly and center rod are reinserted prior to continued
drilling. When formation samples are required at frequent
intervals during borehole advancement, the sequential removal
and reinsertion of the pilot assembly and center rod can be time
consuming. In order to minimize the time required to collect
undisturbed formation samples, continuous sampling tube sys-
tems can be used to replace the traditional pilot assembly.
Continuous samplers enable the collection of formation samples
simultaneously with the advancement of the borehole (Figure
4). Driscoll (1986) states that the pilot assembly and center rod
may be omitted when drilling through some dense formation
materials because these cohesive materials usually form only a
limited 2 to 4-inch thick blockage of material inside the hollow
center of the auger head. Drilling with an open auger head in
the unsaturated zone, however, is not a common practice and is
not recommended where detailed samples of the formation are
required.
144
-------
£<£• Column•
vi
S^^C-terRodlg
.1 .'-irJ> V^°••i-"o - .....• • tP.'JS
.-:*°T*«J
^^Vi^-^c
n:oyb;t.?.- OioSvoSSUn'
• •« • *« * - i^~sr r<*'\l»« •
00^0.:A••v•A^o>.i'V?.o:•.Vo•or
^^^o^^^
--o---'-'>->
|f^|^|^§p;o|
• »!->;••
•W.^P.
Figure 3. Sequential steps showing borehole advancement with pilot assembly and collection of a formation .ample
(after Riggs, 1983).
Heaving Sands —
The drilling techniques used to advance the auger column
within heaving sands may vary greatly from those techniques
used when drilling in unsaturated materials. The problem may
occur when the borehole is advanced to a desired depth without
the use of drilling fluids for the purpose of either sampling the
formation or installing a monitoring well. As the pilot assembly
is retracted, the hydrostatic pressure within the saturated sand
forces water and loose sediments to rise inside the hollow center
of the auger column (Figure 5). Keely and Boateng (1987a)
report that these sediments can rise several tens of feet inside
the lower auger sections. The resulting "plug" of sediment
inside the hollow auger column can interfere with the collec-
tion of formation samples, the installation of the monitoring
well or even additional drilling.
The difficulties with heaving sands may be overcome by
maintaining a positive pressure head within the auger column.
A positive pressure head can be created by adding a sufficient
amount of clean water or other drilling fluid inside the hollow
stem. Clean water (i.e., water which does not contain analytes
of concern to a monitoring program) is usually preferred as the
drilling fluid in order to minimize potential interference with
samples collected from the completed well. The head of clean
water inside the auger column must exceed the hydrostatic
pressure within the sand formation to limit the rise of loose
sediments inside the hollow-stem. Where the saturated sand
formation is unconfined, the water level inside the auger col-
umn is maintained above the elevation of the water table. Where
the saturated sand formation is confined, the water level inside
the auger column is maintained above the potentiometric sur-
face of the formation. If the potentiometric surface of the
formation rises above the ground elevation, however, the heav-
ing sand problem may be very difficult to counteract and may
represent a limitation to the use of the drilling method.
There are several drilling techniques used to maintain a
positive pressure head of clean water within the auger column.
One technique involves injecting clean water through the auger
column during drilling. This method usually entails removal of
the pilot assembly, center rod and drive cap. A special coupling
or adapter is used to connect the auger column to the spindle of
145
-------
Auger Drilling
Auger Column
Barrel Sampler
— Non-rotating
Sampling Rod
Auger Head
Figure 4. Diagram of continuous sampling tube system (after
Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987).
the drilling rig. Clean water is then injected either through the
hollow-center coupling or through the open spindle of the drill
rig as the auger column is advanced (Figure 6). Large diameter,
side-feed water swivels are also available and can be installed
between the drive cap and the hex shank which connects the
auger column to the spindle of the drill rig. Clean water is
injected through the water swivel and into the auger column as
the augers are advanced.
Another drilling technique used to overcome heaving
sands is to first advance the auger column by using a
"nonretrievable" knock-out plate. The knock-out plate is wedged
inside the auger head and replaces the traditional pilot assembly
and center rod (Figure 7a). A major disadvantage of this
drilling technique is that the knock-out plate cannot be alter-
nately removed and reinserted from the auger column to permit
the collection of formation samples as the auger column is
advanced. Once the auger column is advanced to a desired
depth, the column is filled to a sufficient height with clean
water. A ramrod commonly is used to strike and remove the
knock-out plate from the auger head (Figure 7b). The head of
clean water in the auger column must exceed the hydrostatic
pressure in the sand formation to prevent loose sediments from
rising inside the auger column once the knock-out plate is
removed. The nonretrievable knock-out plate should be con-
structed of inert materials when drilling a borehole for the
installation of a water-quality monitoring well. This will mini-
mize concerns over the permanent presence of the knock-out
plate in the bottom of the borehole and the potential effect the
plate may have on ground-water samples collected from the
completed well.
Reverse flight augers represent another unique center plug
design which has had measured success in overcoming prob-
lems with heaving sands (C. Harris, John Mathes and Associ-
ates, personal communication, 1987). The flighting on the
center plug and center rod rotates in an opposite direction from
the flighting on the auger column (Figure 8). As the auger
column advances through the heaving sands, the sand deposits
arc pushed outward from the auger head by the reverse flighting
on the center plug. A sufficient head of clean water is main-
tained inside the auger column to counteract further the hy-
drostatic pressure in the heaving sand formation. Once drilling
is completed, the reverse flight center plug is slowly retracted
from the auger column so that movement of sand into the
hollow stem is not induced.
Although the use of clean water as drilling fluid is
recognized by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency as a proper drilling technique to avoid heaving sand
problems (United States Environmental protection Agency,
1986), the use of any drilling fluid maybe undesirable or pro-
hibited at some ground-water monitoring sites. In these in-
stances, the problem may be overcome by using commercial or
fabricated devices that allow formation water to enter the auger
column, but exclude formation sands. Perry and Hart (1985)
detail the fabrication of two separate devices that allow only
formation water to enter the hollow-stem augers when drilling
in heaving sands. Neither one of these two devices permit the
collection of formation samples as the auger column is ad-
vanced through the heaving sands. The first device consists of
a slotted coupling attached to a knock-out plate (Figure 9). As
the auger column advances below the water table, formation
water enters the auger column through the slotted coupling
(Figure lOa). When the auger column is advanced to the
desired depth, a ramrod is used to dislodge the knock-out plate
with slotted coupling from the auger head (Figure lOb). Perry
and Hart (1985) report that the slotted coupling generally is
successful in counteracting heaving sand problems. However,
where clays and silts are encountered during drilling, the
openings in the slotted coupling may clog and restrict format-
ion water from entering the auger column. To overcome this
plugging problem, Perry and Hart (1985) fabricated a second
device to be used when the slotted coupling became plugged.
The second device is actually a screened well swab (Figure 11).
The swab is connected to a ramrod and is lowered through the
auger column once the column is advanced to the desired
depth. The ramrod is used to strike and remove the knock-out
plate from the auger head (Figure 12). The screened well swab
filters the sand and allows only formation water to enter the
auger column (Perry and Hart, 1985). Once the water level rises
inside the auger column to a height that offsets the hydrostatic
pressure in the formation, the screened well swab is slowly
removed so that movement of sand into the hollow stem is not
induced.
Commercial devices that permit only formation water to
enter the auger column during drilling are also available. These
devices include a variety of patented designs, including
nonwatertight flexible center plugs. These devices replace the
146
-------
:•:;• Pilot Assembly
;':•'•... Being Retracted
Pilot
Assembly
a. Borehole Advanced into Saturated
Sand with Auger Column
Containing Pilot Assembly
Figure 5. Diagram showing heaving sand with hollow-stem auger drilling.
b. Movement of Loose Sands inlo the
Hollow Center of Auger as the Pilot
Assembly is Removed
traditional pilot assembly in the auger head. Some flexible
center plugs are seated, inside the auger head by means of a
specially manufactured groove in the hollow stem. These
flexible center plugs allow split-barrel samplers and thin-
walled tube samplers to pass through the center plug so that
samples of the water bearing sands can recollected (Figure 13).
The flexible center plug, however, cannot be retracted from the
auger head and therefore severely restricts the ability to install
a monitoring well through the auger column. The monitoring
well intake and casing can be inserted through the flexible
center plug, but the plug eliminates the installation of filter pack
and annular sealant (i.e., bentonite pellets) by free fall through
the working space between the well casing and auger column.
Potential Vertical Movement of Contaminants
Within the Borehole
The potential for contaminants to move vertically within
the borehole during drilling is an important consideration when
selecting a drilling method for ground-water monitoring. Ver-
tical mixing of contaminants from different levels within a
single borehole may be a problem with several different drilling
methods, including hollow-stem augers. As the auger column
advances through deposits which contain solid, liquid or gas-
phase contaminants, there may be a potential for these con-
taminants to move either up or down within the borehole.
Where vertical movement of contaminants occurs within the
borehole, the cross contamination may be a significant source
of sampling bias (Gillham et al, 1983).
Vertical movement of contaminants within the borehole
may occur when contaminants from an overlying stratum are
carried downward as residual material on the augers. The
potential for small amounts of contaminated material to adhere
to the auger head and lead auger is greatest in cohesive clayey
deposits (Gillham et al., 1983). Contaminants may also adhere
to split-barrel samplers and thin-walled tube samplers. If these
sampling devices are not adequately cleaned between usage at
successive sampling depths, contaminants from an overlying
stratum may be introduced in a lower stratum via the sampling
device. Where reaming techniques have enlarged the borehole
beyond the outside diameter of the auger flights, contaminants
147
-------
Auger
Drill Rig
Water Swivel
Clean Water
Spindle Adapter Assembly Used for
Injecting Fluids Inside Auger Column
Figure 6. Injecting clean water through open drill spindle to
counteract heaving sand (after Central Mine
Equipment Company, 1987).
from an overlying stratum may slough, fall down the annular
space and come in contact with a lower stratum (Keely and
Boateng, 1987a). Even small amounts of contaminants that
move downward in the borehole, particularly to the depth at
which the intake of the monitoring well is to be located, may
cause anomalous sampling results when analyzing samples for
contaminants at very low concentrations. According to Gillharm
et al. (1983), this potential for sampling bias is greatest at
monitoring sites where shallow geological formations contain
absorbed or immiscible-phase contaminants.
Contaminants may also move upward within a borehole
during hollow-stem auger drilling. As the auger column is
advanced through a stratum containing contaminants, the con-
taminants may be carried upward along with the cuttings.
Contaminated material from a lower stratum may therefore be
brought into contact with an uncontaminated overlying stratum
(Keely and Boateng, 1987a). Cohesive materials within the
contaminated cuttings may 'smear and pack the contaminants on
the sidewalk Where contaminants are displaced and smeared
on the sidewall at the intended monitoring depth, these contamin-
ants may serve as a persistent source of sampling bias.
Vertical movement of dissolved-phase contaminants within
a borehole may also occur where two or more saturated zones
with different heads are penetrated by the auger column. When
the water level in a contaminated, overlying saturated zone is
higher than the potentiometric surface of an underlying
uncontaminated zone, downward leakage of contaminated water
within the borehole may occur. This downward movement of
water may occur even if the augers are continually rotated in an
attempt to maintain the upward movement of cuttings (Gillham
et al., 1983). Conversely, the upward leakage of contaminants
in the borehole may occur where the potentiomernc surface of
an underlying contaminated zone is higher than the water level
in an overlying saturated zone.
The vertical movement of contaminants within the bore-
hole drilled with hollow-stem augers is not well documented in
the published literature. Lack of documentation is partially due
to the difficulty of diagnosing the problem in the field. The
determination that an aquifer was contaminated prior to dril-
ling, during drilling or after installation of the monitoring well
may not easily be made. Keel y and Boateng (1987b), however,
recount a case history in which apparent vertical movement of
contaminants in the borehole occurred either during hollow-stem
auger drilling antd/or after installation of the monitoring well.
This case study involves a site at which a heavily contaminated,
unconfined clayey silt aquifer, containing hard-chrome plating
wastes, is underlain by a permeable, confined sand and gravel
aquifer. Water samples collected from monitoring wells de-
veloped in the lower aquifer showed anomalous concentrations
for chromium. Although vertical ground-water gradientsat the
site were generally downward, the areal distribution and con-
centrations of chromium in the lower aquifer were not indica-
tive of long-term leakage through the aquitard. Based on their
investigation of the site, Keely and Boateng (1987b) conclude
that the localized pattern of chromium values in the lower
aquifer resulted from either vertical movement of contaminants
in the borehole or vertical movement of contaminants through
faulty seals along the casing of the monitoring wells. The
authors hypothesize that the vertical movement of the contamin-
ants in the borehole may have occurred when contaminated
solids from the upper aquifer fell down the annular space during
hollow-stem auger drilling.
The potential for cross contamination during drilling may
be reduced if contamination is known or suspected at a site.
Where a shallow contaminated zone must be penetrated to
monitor ground-water quality at greater depths, a large-diam-
eter surface casing may be used to seal off the upper contami-
nated zone before deeper drilling is attempted. Conventional
hollow-stem auger drilling alone, however, may not always be
adequate for installation of a larger diameter surface casing.
Depending on the hydrogeological conditions at the site, a
"hybrid" drilling method may be necessary in which conven-
tional hollow-stem auger drilling is combined with a casing
driving technique that advances the surface casing as the
borehole is advanced. Driving techniques used to advance and
install surface casing may include conventional cable tool
drilling, rotary drilling with casing hammer or a drop hammer
system on an auger drill rig.
Conventional hollow-stem auger drilling may be used to
set protective surface casing where the shallow geological
formations are comprised of cohesive materials. In this situa-
tion, a large-diameter borehole maybe advanced by the auger
column to a depth below the known contamination (Figure
14a). The auger column is then fully retracted from the borehole
at sites where the borehole will remain open due to the cohesive-
ness of the formation (Figure 14 b). A large-diameter surface
148
-------
Clean Wale/*Level
Within Auger Column"
a, Borehole Advanced into Saturated
Sand with Auger Column Containing
Nonretrievable Knock-Out Plate
b. Clean Water.. Added to Auger
Column Along with Removal of
Knock-Out Plate by Ramrod
Figure 7. Use of a nonretrievable knock-out plate and auger column filled with clean water to avoid a heaving sand problem.
casing is then set and grouted into place. After grouting the
large-diameter surface casing into place a hollow-stem auger
column of smaller outside diamteter is used to advance the
borehole to the desired depth for installation of the monitoring
well (Figure 14c). Typical dimensions for augers used in this
scenario might be an 8 1/4-inch diameter hollow-stem auger
with an auger head cutting diameter of 12 1/2 inches to
advance the borehole below the contaminated zone. A nominal
10-inch diameter surface casing would commonly be installed
within the 12 1/2-inch diameter borehole. Four-and-one-
quarter-inch diameter augers with an eight-and-one-quarter-
inch auger head cutting diameter might then be used to continue
drilling after the surface casing is set.
When the shallow geological formations are comprised of
noncohesive materials and the borehole will not stand open, a
hybrid drilling technique can be used in which the surface
casing is advanced simultaneously with the auger column.
According to Keely and Boateng (1987a), this alternate drilling
technique is used to advance the auger column a few feet at a
time and then to drive the surface casing to the new borehole
depth. The auger column is telescoped inside the surface casing
as the casing is driven outside the augers (Figure 15). Five-foot
lengths of casing typically are used with this technique, and the
casing is driven either by using the same conventional 140-
pound drop hammer that is used to advance split-barrel samplers
or a heavier 300-pound drop hammer. The sequential steps of
augering and casing advancement continue until the surface
casing extends below the depth of known contamination. Once
the surface casing is set, a smaller diameter hollow-stem auger
column can be used to advance the borehole to the desired depth
for monitoring well installation.
Monitoring Well Installation
Monitoring wells may be constructed for water-quality
sampling, water-level measurement or both. The intended
purpose of the well influences the design components of a
monitoring well. The following discussion will focus on tech-
niques used to install water-quality monitoring wells which
consist of a well casing and intake, filter pack and annular seal.
The methods used to construct water-quality monitoring
wells with hollow-stem augers depend primarily on site
hydrogeology. In particular, the cohesiveness of the formation
149
-------
Auger Column -"
Filled with Clean
Water as
Borehole is
Advanced
Reverse Flight
Auger and
Center Rod
Water Level
4
7
Saturated Sand
Formation
f
- Reverse Flight
Auger and
Center Rod
Slowly Retracted
from Auger
: Column
-'Auger Column
Filled with Clean
Water as Reverse
Flight Auger is
Retracted
a. Reverse Flight Auger Pushes
Cuttings Outwardly While Head
of Clean Water is Maintained
Inside Auger Column
b. Reverse Flight Auger Slowly
Being Retracted from Auger
Column
Figure 8. Use of a reverse flight auger to avoid a heaving sand problem (after Central Mine Equipment Company, 1987).
Nipple
I I
r,
s
1 I
/
s- Lock Nut
• 1 ^
• Knock-Out Plate
• Slotted Coupling
Figure 9. Diagram of a slotted coupling
(after Perry and Hart, 1985).
materials penetrated by the auger column may influence the
well construction practices used. If the formation materials are
cohesive enough so that the borehole remains open, the entire
auger column may be retracted from the borehole prior to the
installation of the monitoring well casing and intake, filter pack
and annular seal. However, even in cohesive formation mate-
rials, drillers may refrain from the practice of fully retracting the
auger column from a completed borehole to avoid unexpected
caving of the borehole. The string of well casing and attached
intake may be centered in the open borehole by using casing
centralizers. The filter pack and annular sealant can then be
emplaced through the working annular space between the
borehole and well casing.
When the auger column penetrates noncohesive materials
and the borehole will not remain open, the auger column is used
as a temporary casing during well construction to prevent the
150
-------
Auger Column —,
Filled with
Formation Water.
Knock-Oul Plate
with Slotted
Coupling Permitting
Formation Water
to Enter Auger
Column as
Borehole is
Auger Column *
Waler Level
Saturated Sand
Formation
Knock-Out Plate
with Slotted
Coupling
Removed from
Auger Head by
Ramrod
; Ramrod
Auger Column
Filled with
Formation Watei
Advanced
a. Borehole Advanced into
Saturated Sand with Auger
Column Containing Nonretrievable
Knock-Out Plate with
Slotted Coupling
b. Knock-Out Plate with Slotted
Coupling Removed from Auger
Head by Ramrod
Figure 10. Use of a nonretrievable knock-out plate with a slotted coupling to avoid a heaving sand problem
(after Perry and Hart, 1985).
Supporting Pipe
Pipe Flange
-t- Brass Screen
Pipe Flange
Inside Diameter of
Hollow-Stem Auger
C - — Ball Valve
Nipple
Figure 11. Diagram of a screened well swab
(after Perry and Hart, 1985).
possible collapse of the borehole wall. When the auger column
is used as a temporary casing during well construction, the
hollow axis of the auger column facilitates the installation of the
monitoring well casing and intake, filter pack and annular
sealant. However, the practices that are used to emplace these
well construction materials through the working space inside
the hollow-stem augers are not standardized among contrac-
tors. Lack of standardization has resulted in concerns about the
proper emplacement of the filter pack and annular seal in the
monitoring well. To address these concerns, the topic of
monitoring well construction through hollow-stem augers is
presented in three separate discussions 1) well casing diameter
versus inside diameter of the hollow-stem auger 2) installation
of the filter pack; and 3) installation of the annular seal.
Well Casing Diameter Versus Inside Diameter of
the Hollow-Stem Auger
Once the borehole has been advanced to the desired depth
for installation of the monitoring well, the pilot assembly and
center rod (if used) are removed, and the depth of the borehole
is measured. A measuring rod or weighted measuring tape is
lowered through the hollow axis of the auger column. This
depth measurement is compared to the total length of the auger
151
-------
^ ^ Auger Column
x
Saturated Sand
Formation ,
Screened Well •
Swab, Attached to
Ramrod, Used to
Filter Out Sand and
Permit Formation
Water to Enter
Auger Column
Ramrod with
Screened Well
Swab Attached
Water Level
Water Level
Rising Inside
Auger Column
After Removal of
Knock-Out Plate
Knock-OUt Plate
with Clogged
Slotted Coupling
Removed from
Auger Heed by
Ramrod
Figure 12. Use of a screened well swab to avoid a heaving and problem (after Perry end Hart, 1985).
column in the borehole to determine whether loose sediments
have risen inside the hollow stem. Provided that the hollow
stem is clear of sediment, a sting of well casing with attached
intake is lowered inside the auger column. Threaded, flush-joint
casing and intake are commonly used to provide a string of
casing with a uniform outside and inside diameter.
Although the well casing and intake may be centered
inside the auger column, many contractors place the well casing
and intake toward one side of the inner hollow-stem wall
(Figure 17). The eccentric placement of the casing and intake
within the hollow-stem auger is designed to create a maximum
amount of working space (shown by the distance "A" in Figure
17) between the outer wall of the casing and the inner wall of
the auger. This working space is used to convey and emplace the
filter pack and the annular sealant through the auger column.
Table 3 lists the maximum working space (A) that is available
between various diameters of threaded, flush-joint casing and
hollow-stem augers, if the casing is set toward one side of the
inner hollow-stem wall.
The selection of an appropriate sized hollow-stem auger
for drilling and monitoring-well construction should take into
account the nominal diameter of the well casing to be installed
and the working space needed to properly convey and emplace
the filter pack and annular sealant. The smallest hollow-stem
augers typically used for installing 2-inch nominal diameter
casing are 3 1/4-inch diameter augers; the smallest hollow-stem
augers typically used for installing 4-inch nominal diameter
casing are 6 1/4-inch diameter augers (Riggs and Hatheway,
1988). Table 3 shows, however, that the maximum working
space available between a 2-inch nominal diameter casing and
a 3 1/4-inch diameter hollow-stem auger is less than 1 inch (i.e.,
0.875 inch). This small working space can make the proper
emplacement of the filter pack and annular seal very difficult,
if not impossible. Too small a working space can either restrict
the use of equipment (i.e., tremie pipe) that maybe necessary
for the placement of the filter pack and annular seal or inhibit
the ability to properly measure the actual emplacement of these
materials in the borehole. A small working space can also
increase the possibility of bridging problems when attempting
to convey the filter pack and annular sealant between the
hollow-stem auger and well casing. Bridging occurs when the
filter pack or annular seal material spans or arches across the
152
-------
Table 3. Maximum Working Space Available Between Various Diameters of Threaded, Flush-Joint Casing and Hollow-Stem Augers
Nominal
Diameter
of Casing
(in.)
2
3
4
5
6
Outside
Diameter
of Casing
*(in.)
2.375
3.500
4.500
5.563
6.625
Working Space "A" (see Figure 17) for
Various Inside Diameter Hollow-Stem
Augers " (in.)
31/4 33/4 41/4 61/4
0.875 1.375 1.875 3.875
0.250 0.750 2.750
1.750
0.687
81/4
5.815
4.750
3.750
2.687
1.625
Based on ASTM Standards D-1785 and F-480
' inside diameters of hoiiow-stem augers taken from Table 1.
Flexible Center
Plug Permitting
Collection of
Water-Bearing
Sands, but
Preventing
Heaving Sands
from Entering
/,. Hollow Stem
Figure 13. Flexible center plug in an auger head used to overcome heaving sands and permit sampling of formation materials
(after Diedrich Drilling Equipment, 1986).
153
-------
l' Shallow
••^ Contaminant '-^
Large-Diameter
Auger Used to -
Advance
Borehole in ~
Cohesive —
Materials
10pen Borehole -^.' _
' Shallow
Contaminant
Zone
"Protective __v_
Surface Casing ^
Set Below
Contaminant
Zone —
Grouted Annular
_ . Space
— a. Large-Diameter Borehole — — —
Advanced Below Known Depth"_*>• Auger Column Retracted from--
•— • -— of Contamination • — • Borehole Which Remains Open.
• — • • • — Due to Cohesive Materials
Small-Diameter I. ".
Auger Used to — • —
Advance ' ~
Borehole to a 1-H '. ~
Deeper Depth -—- • -
for Installation of—' . _
Monitoring Well • •
c. Surface Casing Installed Below
Known Depth of Contamination
with Drilling Continued Using
Smaller Diameter Auger
Figure 14. Sequence showing the installation of protective surface casing through a shallow contaminated zone in a cohesive
space between the inner diameter of the auger and the outer
diameter of the casing. The bridge of filter pack or annular seal
material forms a barrier which blocks the downward movement
of additional material through the working space. As a result,
gaps or large unfilled voids may occur around the well intake or
well casing due to the nonuniform placement of the filter pack
or annular seal. Bridged material can lock the casing due to the
nonuniform placement of the filter pack or annular seal. Bridged
material can lock the casing and auger together and result in the
well casing being retracted from the borehole along with the
augers. Most contractors prefer to use 4 1/4-inch diameter
augers to install 2-inch nominal diameter casing, and 8 1/4-inch
diameter augers to install 4-inch nominal diameter casing to
create an adequate working space that facilitates the proper
emplacement of the filter pack and annular seal (C. Harris, John
Mathes and Associates, personal communication, 1987). Ac-
cording to United States Environmental Protection Agency
(1986), the inner diameter of the auger should be 3 to 5 inches
greater than the outer diameter of the well casing for effective
placement of the filter pack and annular sealant. Based on the
United Sates Environmental Protection Agency guideline for
effective working space, 6 1/4-inch diameter hollow-stem
augers would be the recommended minimum size auger for
installing a 2-inch nominal diameter casing. In addition, the
maximum diameter of a well which could be installed through
the hollow axis of the larger diameter augers, which are com-
monly available at this time, would be limited to 4 inches or less.
Installation of the Filter Pack
After the well casing and intake are inserted through the
hollow axis of the auger column, the next phase of monitoring
well construction commonly involves the installation of a filter
pack. The filter pack is a specially sized and graded, rounded,
clean silica sand which is emplaced in the annular space
between the well intake and borehole wall (Figure 16).
The primary purpose of the filter pack is to filter out finer-
sized particles from the formation materials adjacent to the well
intake. The filter pack also stabilizes the formation materials
and thereby minimizes settlement of materials above the well
intake. The appropriate grain size for the filter pack is usually
selected based on a sieve analysis of the formation material
adjacent to the well intake. The filter pack is usually a uniform,
well-sorted coarse to medium sand (i.e., 5.0 mm to 0.40 mm).
However, graded filter packs may be used in a monitoring well
which has an intake installed in a fine-grained formation. The
graded filter pack may filter and stabilize silt and clay-sized
Formation particles more effectively. The completion of a
154
-------
Drop Hammer
used to Drive
Casing
•;V.-CV>\: i*ix.O
r-aic»A-s?nSO«>a«?i.-«i o-.-n «-•
a. Auger Column Advances
Borehole Slightly Beyond
Casing
b. Driving the Casing to the
New Borehole Depth
Figure 15. Sequence showing the installation of protective surface casing through a shallow contaminated zone in a noncohesive
formation (after Keely and Boateng, 1987a).
monitoring well with a properly sized, graded and emplaced
filter pack minimizes the extent to which the monitoring well
will produce water samples with suspended sediments.
The filter pack typically extends from the bottom of the
well intake to a point above the top of the intake (Figure 16).
The filter pack is extended above the top of the well intake to
allow for any settlement of the filter pack that may occur during
well development and to provide an adequate distance between
the well intake and the annular seal. As a general rule, the length
of the filter pack is 10 percent greater than the length of the
intake to compensate for settlement. United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency (1986) recommends that the filter
pack extend from the bottom of the well intake to a maximum
height of 2 feet above the top of the intake, with the maximum
height specified to ensure discrete sample horizons.
The thickness of the filter pack between the well intake and
borehole wall generally will not be uniform because the well
casing and intake usually are not centered in the hollow axis of
the auger column. The filter pack, however, should be at least
thick enough to completely surround the well intake. Tables 1
and 2 show that the cutting diameter of the auger head ranges
from 4 to 7 1/4 inches larger than the inside diameter of the
hollow-stem auger. When the well casing and intake are posi-
tioned toward one side of the inner hollow-stem wall (Figure
17), the annular space between the well intake and borehole
wall may be as small as 2 to 3 5/8 inches. This annular space
may still be adequate to preclude bridging and irregular em-
placement of the filter pack however, there is marginal
tolerance for borehole sloughing or installation error. The
proper installation of a falter pack with hollow-stem augers can
be difficult if there is an inadequate working space between the
casing and the auger column through which the filter pack is
conveyed (Minning, 1982; Richter and Collentine, 1983; Gass,
1984; schmidt 1986 Keely and Boateng, 1987b).
155
-------
Locking Casing Cap
Vent Hole
Protective Casing—r^
Ground Surface
Well Casing
Annular Seal
Inner Casing Cap
Lock
Drainhole
Filter Pack
Surface Seal
Water Table
Borehole
Well Intake
Completion Depth -
Figure 16. Typical design components of a ground-water
monitoring well.
The volume of filter pack required to fill the annular space
between the well intake and borehole wall should be predeter-
mined prior to the emplacement of the filter pack. In order to
determine the volume of filter pack needed, three design criteria
should be known. These three criteria include 1) the design
length of the fiter pack; 2) the diameter of the borehole; and 3)
the outside diameter of the well intake and casing. This infor-
mation is used to calculate both the volume of the borehole and
the volume of the well intake and casing over the intended
length of the filter pack. Once both volumes are calculated, the
volume of the well intake and casing is subtracted from the
volume of the borehole to determine the volume of filter pack
needed to fill the annular space between the well intake and
borehole wall. For example, Figure 18 illustrates a 2-inch
nominal diameter well casing and intake inserted through the
hollow axis of a 4 1/4-inch diameter hollow-stem auger. Based
on the cutting diameter of the auger head, the diameter of the
borehole is shown as 8 1/4 inches and the length of the well
intake is 10 feet. The design length of the filter pack is 12 feet
to ensure that the filter pack extends 2 feet above the top of the
intake. The volume of the borehole over the 12 foot design
length of the filter pack will be 4.36 cubic feet. Using 2.375
inches as the outside diameter of the well intake and casing, the
volume of the intake and casing over the 12-foot design length
of the filter pack will be 0.38 cubic feet. By subtracting 0.38
cubic feet from 4.36 cubic feet, the volume of filter pack needed
to fill the annular space is determined to be 3.98 or approxi-
mately 4 cubic feet.
Once the theoretical volume of filter pack is calculated, this
volume is divided by the design length of the filter pack to
determine the amount of the material which should be needed
to fill the annulus for each lineal foot that the auger column is
retracted. Referring again to the example illustrated in Figure
18,4 cubic feet divided by 12 feet would equal approximately
one-third cubic foot per foot. Therefore, for each foot that the
auger column is retracted, one-third cubic foot of filter pack
should be needed to fill the annular space between the well
intake and borehole wall.
The methods which are used to convey the filter pack
through the working space in the auger column and to emplace
this material in the annular space between the well intake and
borehole wall depend on: 1) the cohesiveness of the formation
materials; 2) the height of a standing water column in the
working space between the casing and augers; and 3) the grain-
size and uniformity coefficient of the filter pack.
In cohesive formation materials in which the borehole
stands open, the filter pack commonly is emplaced by axially
retracting the auger column from the borehole in short incre-
ments and pouring the filter pack down the working space
between the casing and auger column. Prior to filter pack em-
placement, a measuring rod or weighted measuring tape is
lowered to the bottom of the borehole through the working
space between the well casing and auger column (Figure 19a)
so that the total depth of the borehole can be measured and
recorded. The auger column is initially retracted 1 or 2 feet
from the borehole (Figure 19b). A measured portion of the
precalculated volume of the filter pack is slowly poured down
the working space between the well casing and auger column
(Figure 19c). The filter pack is typically poured at a point
diametrically opposite from the measuring rod or weighted
measuring tape. As the filter pack is being poured, the measur-
ing device is alternately raised and lowered to "feel" and
measure the actual placement of the filter pack. If a weighted
measuring tape is used as the measuring device, the tape is kept
in constant motion to minimize potential binding and loss of
the weighted tape as the filter pack is being poured. Continuous
measurements of the depth to the top of the emplaced filter
pack are usually made as the filter pack is slowly poured down
the working space in order to avoid allowing the emplaced filter
pack to rise up between the well intake/casing and the inside of
the hollow-stem auger. If the filter pack is permitted to rise up
between the casing and auger, the filter pack may lock the
casing and auger together and result in the casing being re-
tracted from the borehole along with the augers. Once the filter
pack is emplaced to the bottom of the auger column, the augers
are retracted another 1 to 2 feet and a second measured portion
of the filter pack is added. These steps are repeated until the
required length of filter pack is emplaced. By knowing the
theoretical amount of filter pack needed to fill the annular space
between the well intake and borehole wall for each increment
in which the auger column is retracted, the emplacement of the
filter pack may be closely monitored. Calculations of the "filter
pack needed" versus "filter pack used" should be made and
recorded for each increment that the auger column is retracted.
Any discrepancies should be explained.
Placement of filter pack by free fall through the working
space between well casing and auger column can present the
potential for bridging or segregation of the filter pack material.
As described earlier, bridging can result in unfilled voids within
the filter pack or in the failure of the filter pack materials to be
properly conveyed through the working space between the well
casing and auger column. Bridging problems, however, may be
minimized by: 1) an adequately sized working space between
the well casing and auger column; 2) slowly adding the filter
156
-------
Threaded, Flush
Joint Casing
and Intake
Inside Diameter of
! Hollow-Stem Auger
Maximum
Working Space
Maximum
Working Space
C -
Hollow-Stem
Auger
. A-4. + C'
I Outside Diameter!
\ of Casing y
—"*>S^ f^S Auger Column "|jg
/ ";?C?o
- Well Casing
Inserted through
Hollow-Stem
a. Plan View
b. Cross-Sectional View
Figure 17. Plan and cross-sectional views showing the maximum working apace (A) between the well casing and the hollow-Stern
auger.
pack in small amounts; and 3) carefully raising and lowering
the measuring rod or weighted measuring tape while the filter
pack is being added.
Segregation of graded filter pack material during free fall
through the working space between the well casing and auger
column may still occur, especially where the static water level
between the casing and augers is shallow. As the sand-sized
particles fall through the standing column of water, a greater
drag is exerted on the smaller sand-sized particles due to the
higher surface area-to-weight ratio. As a result, coarser par-
ticles fall more quickly through the column of water and reach
the annular space between the well intake and borehole wall
first. The coarser parrticles may therefore comprise the bottom
portion of the filter pack, and the smaller-sized particles may
comprise the upper portion of each segment of filter pack
emplaced. Driscoll (1986) states that segregation may not be
a significant problem when emplacing uniform grain size, well-
sorted filter packs with a uniformity coefficient of 2.5 or less.
However, graded filter packs are more susceptible to segrega-
tion problems, and this could result in the well consistently
producing water samples with suspended sediment.
Potential bridging problems or segregation of graded filter
packs may be minimized by using a tremie pipe to convey and
emplace the filter pack. The use of a tremie pipe may be
particularly important where the static water level between the
well casing and auger column is shallow. Schmidt (1986) has
suggested that at depths greater than 50 feet, a tremie pipe
should be used to convey and emplace filter pack through
hollow-stem augers. A tremie pipe is a hollow, thin-walled,
rigid tube or pipe which is commonly fabricated by connecting
individual lengths of threaded, flush-joint pipe. The tremie pipe
should have a sufficient diameter to allow passage of the filter
pack through the pipe. The inside diameter of a tremie pipe used
for filter pack emplacement is typically 1 1/2 inches or greater
to minimize potential bridging problems inside the tremie.
Emplacement of the filter pack begins by lowering a
measuring rod or weighted measuring tape to the bottom of the
borehole, as previously described in the free fall method of
filter pack emplacement. The auger column commonly is
retracted 1 to 2 feet, and the tremie pipe is lowered to the bottom
of the borehole through the working space between the well
casing and auger column (Figure 20a). A measured portion of
the precalculated volume of filter pack is slowly poured down
the tremie and the tremie is slowly raised as the filter pack
discharges from the bottom of the pipe, tilling the annular
space between the well intake and borehole wall (Figure 20b).
Once the filter pack is emplaced to the bottom of the auger
157
-------
2-Inch Nominal Diameter -
Well Casing and Intake
4 1/4+inch Diameter
Hollow-Stem Auger
Design Length
of Filter Pack
12 Feet
T
Length of
Well Intake
10 Feet
1
Borehole
' Diameter "
8 1/4 inches
Figure 18. Illustration for the sample calculation of a filter pack
as described in the text.
column, the augers are retracted another 1 to 2 feet and a second
measured portion of the filter pack is added through the tremie
pipe. This alternating sequence of auger column retraction
followed by addtional filter pack emplacement is continued
until the required length of filter pack is installed. Similar to the
free fall method of filter pack emplacement, careful measure-
ments usually are taken and recorded for each increment of
filter pack which is added and emplaced.
During filter pack emplacement, whether by free fall or
tremie methods, the auger column may be refracted from the
borehole in one of two ways (C. Harris, John Mathes and
Associates, personal communication, 1987). One method of
retracting the augers is to use the drive cap to connect the auger
column to the drill head. The drill head then pulls back the auger
column from the borehole. This technique, however, com-
monly requires the measuring rod, weighted measuring tape or
tremie pipe (if used) to be removed from the working space
between the wall casing and auger column each time the auger
column is retracted. A second method of retracting the augers
is to hook a winch line onto the outside of the open top of the
auger column. The winch line is then used to pull the augers
back. The use of a winch line to pull the auger column from the
borehole enables the measuring rod, weighted measuring tape
or tremie pipe to remain in the working space between the well
casing and auger column as the augers are retracted. This latter
auger retraction technique may provide greater continuity be-
tween measurements taken during each increment of filter
pack emplacement. Retracting the auger column with the
winch line can also permit the option of adding filter pack
while the auger column is simultaneously withdrawn from the
borehole. Bridging problems, which lock the well casing and
augers together and cause the casing to pull out of the borehole
along with the augers, may also be more readily detected when
the auger column is retracted by using a winch line. The use of
a winch line, however, may pull the auger column off center. If
the auger column is pulled off center, them maybe an increased
potential for the casing to become wedged within the augers.
When the formation materials adjacent to the well intake
are noncohesive and the borehole will not remain open as the
auger column is retracted, the method for installing the filter
pack may require the use of clean water (C. Harris, John Mathes
and Associates, personal communication, 1987). Similar to the
other methods of filter pack emplacement, a measuring rod or
weighted measuring tape is first lowered to the bottom of the
borehole through the working space between the well casing
and auger column. Clean water is then added to the working
space between the casing and augers to maintain a positive
pressure head in the auger column. As the auger column is
slowly retracted using a winch line, a measured portion of the
precalculated volume of filter pack is poured down the working
space between the well casing and auger column. The head of
clean water in the working space between the casing and augers
usually holds the borehole open while the filter pack material is
emplaced in the annular space between the well intake and
borehole wall. This procedure of slowly retracting the auger
column with a winch line while filter pack material is poured
through a positive pressure head of clean water in the working
space continues until the required length of filter pack is
installed. Once again, measurements of the emplaced filter
pack usually are taken and recorded along with calculations of
"filter pack needed' versus "filter pack used."
If the formation materials adjacent to the well intake are
noncohesive and comprised of coarse-grained sediments, an
artificial filter pack may not have to be installed. The natural
coarse-grained sediments from the formation may instead be
allowed to collapse around the well intake (with appropriately
sized openings) as the auger column is refracted from the
borehole. This procedure initially involves retracting the auger
column 1 to 2 feet. A measuring rod or weighted measuring tape
is then lowered through the working space between the auger
column and casing to verify the collapse of formation material
around the well intake and to measure the depth to the top of
"caved" materials. Once the formation materials collapse
around the well intake and fill the borehole beneath the auger
column, the augers are retracted another 1 to 2 feet. This
alternating sequence of refracting the auger column and verify-
ing the collapse of formation materials by measuring the depth
to the top of the caved materials continues until the coarse-
158
-------
Weighted
Measuring Tape
Well Casing
-C1
Hollow-Stem
Auger
Weighted
Measuring Tape
Hollow-Stem
Auger
Plan View
Weighted
Measuring Tape
Cross-Sectional view
a. Placement of Weighted
Measuring Tape
Weighted
Measuring Tape
Auger Column
Retracted Weighted-'"
1 to 2 Feet Measuring Tape
from Borehole
We" Casing
Filter Pack
Plan View Pounng
b. Auger Column Retracted
Filter Pack
Cross -Sectional View
c. Filter Pack Free-Fails Through
Working Space Between Casing
and Auger
Figure 19. Free fall method of filter pack emplacement with a hollow-stem auger.
grained sediments extend to a desired height above the top of the
well intake. The finer-grained fraction of the collapsed forma-
tion materials is later removed from the area adjacent to the well
intake during well development.
Installation of the Annular Seal
Once the well intake, well casing and filter pack are
installed through the hollow axis of the auger column, the final
phase of monitoring well construction typically involves the
installation of an annular seal. The annular seal is constructed
by emplacing a stable, low permeability material in the annular
space between the well casing and borehole wall (Figure 16).
The sealant is commonly bentonite, expanding neat cement or
a cement-bentonite mixture. The annular seal typically extends
from the top of the filter pack to the bottom of the surface seal.
The annular seal provides: 1) protection against the movement
of surface water or near-surface contaminants down the casing-
borehole annulus; 2) isolation of discrete sampling zones; and
3) prevention of the vertical movement of water in the casing-
borehole annulus and the cross-contamination of strata. An
effective annular seal requires that the casing-borehole annulus
be completely filled with a sealant and that the physical integ-
rity of the seal be maintained throughout the life of the monitor-
ing well. The sealant should ideally be chemically nonreactive
to minimize any potential impact the sealant may have on the
quality of ground-water samples collected from the completed
monitoring well.
Although bentonite and cement are the two most widely
used annular sealants for monitoring wells, these materials have
the potential for affecting the quality of ground-water samples.
Bentonite has a high cation exchange capacity and may have an
appreciable impact on the chemistry of the collected ground-
water samples, particularly when the bentonite seal is in close
proximity to the well intake (Gibb, 1987). Hydrated cement is
highly alkaline and may cause persistent, elevated pH values in
ground-water samples when the cement seal is near or adjacent
to the well intake (Dunbar et al, 1985). Raising the pH of the
ground water may further alter the volubility and presence of
other constituents in the ground-water samples.
An adequate distance between the well intake and the
annular sealant is typically provided when the filter pack is
extended 2 feet above the top of the well intake. Bentonite
pellets are commonly emplaced on top of the filter pack in the
saturated zone (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 1986). Water in the saturated zone hydrates and
expands the bentonite pellets thereby forming a seal in the
casing-borehole annulus above the filter pack. The use of
bentonite pellets direct] y on top of the filter pack generally is
preferred because the pellet-form of bentonite may minimize
159
-------
Weighted
Measuring Tape
C- -
Plan—View
Weighted
Measuring Tape
Auger Column
Retracted
1 to 2 Feet
from Borehole j
Well Casing
- - C1
Tremie Pipe
Tremie Pipe
Positioned to
Bottom of
Borehole
— C'
Weighted
Measuring Tape
^r
a. Weighted Measurng Tape and
Tremie Ptpe in Retracted
Auger Column
Tremie Pipe
Slowly Raised as
Filter Pack is
Poured
Filter Pack
Material Poured
Down Tremie
Filter Pack
b. Filter Pack Poured Through Bottom-
Discharge Tremie Pipe
Figure 20. Tremie method of filter pack emplacement with a hollow-stem auger.
the threat of the bentonite infiltrating the filter pack. United
States Environmental Protection Agency (1986) recommends
that there be a minimum 2-foot, height of bentonite pellets in
the casing-borehole annulus above the filter pack. The bento-
nite pellets, however, should not extend above t.hc saturated
zone.
Bentonite pellets are emplaced through the hollow-stem
augers by free fall of the pellets through the working space
between the well casing and auger column. Prior to emplacing
the bentonite pellets, the theoretical volume of bentonite pellets
needed to fill the annular space between the well casing and
borehole wall over the intended length of the seal is determined
(see section on Installation of the Filter Pack for a discussion on
how to calculate the theoretical volume of material needed). A
measuring rod or weighted measuring tape is lowered to the top
of the filter pack through the working space between the casing
and augers. A depth measurement is taken and recorded. The
auger column is then retracted 1 or 2 feet from the borehole and
a measured portion of the precalculated volume of bentonite
pellets is slowly poured down the working space between the
well casing and auger column. In some instances, the bentonite
pellets may be individually dropped, rather than poured, down
this working space. The bentonite pellets free fall through the
working space between the casing and augers and fill the
annular space between the well casing and borehole wall
immediately above the filter pack. As the bentonite pellets are
being added, the measuring rod or weighted measuring tape is
slowly raised and lowered to lightly tamp the pellets in place
and to measure the depth of emplacement of the bentonite
pellets. Once the bentonite pellets are emplaced to the bottom
of the auger column, the augers are again retracted 1 or 2 feet
from the borehole and more bentonite pellets are added. This
procedure continues until the bentonite pellets are installed to
the required height above the filter pack. Actual depth measure-
ments of the emplaced pellets are recorded and compared with
the calculations for the volume of "bentonite pellets needed"
versus "bentonite pellets used."
The free fall of bentonite pellets through the working space
between the well casing and auger column provides the op-
portunity for bridging problems to occur. Bridging problems
are likely to occur particularly when the static water level in the
working space is shallow and the well is relatively deep. As
bentonite pellets fall through a column of standing water, the
bentonite on the outer surface of the pellet starts to hydrate and
the pellet surface expands and becomes sticky. Individual
bentonite pellets may begin sticking to the inside wall of the
160
-------
auger column or to the outer surface of the well casing after
having fallen only a few feet through a column of water between
the casing and augers. Bentonite pellets may also stick together
and bridge the working space between the casing and augers.
As a result, the pellets may not reach the intended depth for
proper annular seal emplacement. The bentonite pellets will
continue to expand as the bentonite fully hydrates. An expand-
ing bridge of bentonite pellets in the working space may
eventually lock the well casing and auger column together
causing the casing to pull back out of the borehole as the auger
column is retracted.
Careful installation techniques can minimize the bridging
of bentonite pellets in the working space between the casing and
augers. These techniques include: 1) adequately sizing the
working space between the well casing and auger column; 2)
slowly adding individual bentonite pellets through the working
space; and 3) frequently raising and lowering the measuring
device to breakup potential bridges of pellets. Driscoll (1986)
reports that freezing the bentonite pellets or cooling the pellets
with liquid nitrogen to form an icy outer coating may enable
the bentonite pellets to free fall a greater depth through standing
water before hydration of the pellets begins. The frozen
bentonite pellets should, however, be added individually in the
working space between the casing and augers to avoid clump-
ing of the frozen pellets as they contact the standing water in the
working space.
The potential problem of bentonite pellets bridging the
working space between the well casing and auger column may
be avoided by using instead a bentonite slurry, neat cement
grout or cement-bentonite mixture pumped directly into the
annular space between the well casing and borehole wall in the
saturated zone. In the unsaturated zone, neat cement grout or a
cement-bentonite mixture commonly is used as the annular
sealant. In either instance, the slurry is pumped under positive
pressure through a tremie pipe which is first lowered through
the working space between the well casing and auger column.
However, tremie emplacement of a bentonite slurry or cement-
based grout directly on top of the filter pack is not recommended
because these slurry mixtures may easily infiltrate into the
filter pack. Ramsey et al, (1982) recommend that a 1 to 2-foot
thick fine sand layer be placed on top of the filter pack prior to
emplacement of the bentonite slurry or cement grout. The fine-
sand layer minimizes the potential for the grout slurry to
infiltrate into the filter pack. If bentonite pellets are initially
emplaced on top of the filter pack, prior to the addition of a
bentonite slurry or cement-based grout the pellets serve the
same purpose as the fine sand and minimize the potential for the
infiltration of the grout slurry into the filter pack. When bento-
nite pellets are used, a suitable hydration period, as recom-
mended by the manufacturer, should be allowed prior to the
placement of the grout slurry. Failure to allow the bentonite
pellets to fully hydrate and seal the annular space above the
filter pack may result in the grout slurry infiltrating into the filter
pack.
A side-discharge tremie pipe, rather than a bottom-dis-
charge tremie pipe, should be used to emplace bentonite slurry
or cement-based grouts above the filter pack. Aside-discharge
tremie may be fabricated by plugging the bottom end of the pipe
and drilling 2 or 3 holes in the lower 1 -foot section of the tremie.
The pumped slurry will discharge laterally from the tremie and
dissipate any fluid-pumping energy against the borehole wall
and well casing. This eliminates discharging the pumped slurry
directly downward toward the filter pack and minimizes the
potential for the sealant to infiltrate into the filter pack.
Prior to emplacing a bentonite slurry or cement-based
grout via the tremie method, the theoretical volume of slurry
needed to fill the annular space between the well casing and
borehole wall over the intended length of the annular seal is
determined (see section on Installation of the Filter Pack for a
discussion on how to calculate the theoretical volume of mate-
rial needed). An additional volume of annular sealant should
be prepared and readily available at the drill site to use if a
discrepancy occurs between the volume of "annular sealant
needed" versus "annular sealant used." The installation of the
annular sealant should be completed in one continuous opera-
tion which permits the emplacement of the entire annular seal.
The procedure for emplacing a bentonite slurry or cement-
based grout with a tremie pipe begins by lowering a measuring
rod or weighted measuring tape through the working space
between the well casing and auger column. A measurement of
the depth to the top of the fine sand layer or bentonite pellet seal
above the filter pack is taken and recorded. The auger column
is commonly retracted 2 1/2 to 5 feet, and a side-discharge
tremie pipe, with a minimum 1 -inch inside diameter, is lowered
through the working space between the casing and augers. The
bottom of the tremie is positioned above the fine sand layer or
bentonite pellet seal. A measured portion of the precalculated
volume of bentonite slurry or cement-based grout is pumped
through the tremie. The grout slurry discharges from the side
of the pipe, filling the annular space between the well casing and
borehole wall. As the grout slurry is pumped through the
tremie, the measuring rod or weighted measuring tape is slowly
raised and lowered to detect and measure the depth of slurry
emplacement. Once the slurry is emplaced to the bottom of the
auger column, the augers are retracted by using a winch line, the
measuring rod or tape and tremie pipe may remain inside the
working space between the casing and augers as the augers are
pulled back from the borehole. Retracting the auger column
with the winch line may also permit the option of pumping the
grout slurry through the tremie while the auger column is
simultaneously withdrawn from the borehole. A quick-dis-
connect fitting can be used to attach the grout hose to the top of
the tremie pipe. This fitting allows the grout hose to be easily
detached from the tremie as individual 5-foot auger sections are
disconnected from the top of the auger column. By successively
retracting the auger column and pumping the bentonite slurry or
cement-based grout into the annular space between the well
casing and borehole wall, the annular sealant is emplaced from
the bottom of the annular space to the top. The tremie pipe can
be moved upward as the slurry is emplaced, or it can be left in
place at the bottom of the annulus until the annular seal is
emplaced to the required height. Measurements of the depths
of the emplaced annular seal are taken and recorded. Calcula-
tions of the theoretical volume of "annular sealant needed"
versus "annular sealant used" should also be recorded, and any
discrepancies should be explained.
Summary
Hollow-stem augers, like all drilling methods, have ad-
vantages and limitations for drilling and constructing monitor-
161
-------
ing wells. Advantages of using hollow-stem auger drilling
equipment include: 1) the mobility of the drilling rig; 2) the
versatility of multi-purpose rigs for auger drilling, rotary drill-
ing and core drilling; 3) the ability to emplace well casing and
intake, filter pack and annular seal material through the hollow-
stem auger, and 4) the utility of the hollow-stem auger for
collecting representative or relatively undisturbed samples of
the formation. Other advantages associated with hollow-stem
augers relate to the drilling procedure and include: 1) relatively
fast advancement of the borehole in unconsolidated deposits; 2)
minimal formation damage in sands and gravels; 3) minimal, if
any, use of drilling fluids in the borehole and 4) good control
or containment of cuttings exiting from the borehole. Limitat-
ions of the drilling procedure include: 1) the inability to drill
through hard rock or deposits with boulders; 2) smearing of the
silts and clays along the borehole wall; 3) a variable maximum
drilling depth capability, which is typically less than 150 feet
for most rigs; and 4) a variable borehole diameter.
The drilling techniques used to advance a borehole with
hollow-stem augers may vary when drilling in the unsaturated
versus the saturated zone. In the unsaturated zone, drilling
fluids are rarely, if ever, used. However, in a saturated zone in
which heaving sands occur, changes in equipment and drilling
techniques are required to provide a positive pressure head of
water within the auger column. This may require the addition
of clean water or other drilling fluid inside the augers. If a
positive pressure head of water cannot be maintained inside the
auger column when drilling in heaving sands, the heaving sands
may represent a limitation to the use of hollow-stem augers for
the installation of a monitoring well.
The vertical movement of contaminants in the borehole
may be a concern when drilling with hollow-stem augers.
When monitoring the quality of ground water below a known
contaminated zone, hollow-stem auger drilling may not be
advisable unless protective surface casing can be installed.
Depending on the site hydrogeology, conventional hollow-
stem auger drilling techniques alone may not be adequate for
the installation of the protective surface casing. A hybrid
drilling method may be needed which combines conventional
'hollow-stem auger drilling with a casing driving technique that
advances the borehole and surface casing simultaneously.
The procedure used to construct monitoring wells with
hollow-stem augers may vary significantly depending on the
hydrogeologic conditions at the drill site. In cohesive materials
where the borehole stands open, the auger column may be fully
retracted from the borehole prior to the installation of the
monitoring well. In noncohesive materials in which the bore-
hole will not remain open, the monitoring well is generally
constructed through the hollow axis of the auger column.
The procedures used to construct monitoring wells inside
the hollow-stem augers may also vary depending on specific
site conditions and the experience of the driller. The proper
emplacement of the filter pack and annular seal can be difficult
or impossible, if an inadequate working space is available
between the well casing and hollow-stem auger. An adequate
working space can be made available by using an appropri-
ately-sized diameter hollow-stem auger for the installation of
the required-size well casing and intake. The maximum diam-
eter of a monitoring well constructed through the hollow-stem
auger of the larger diameter augers now commonly available
will typically be limited to 4 inches or less. Assurance that the
filter pack and annular seal are properly emplaced is typically
limited to careful measurements taken and recorded during
construction of the monitoring well.
References
Central Mine and Equipment Company, 1987. Catalog of
product literature; St. Louis, Missouri, 12 pp.
Diedrich Drilling Equipment, 1986. Catalog of product
literature; LaPorte, Indiana, 106 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher G., 1986. Groundwater and Wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Dunbar, Dave, Hal Tuchfield, Randy Siegel and Rebecca
Sterbentz, 1985. Ground water quality anomalies
encountered during well construction, sampling and
analysis in the environs of a hazardous waste management
facility; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 5, No. 3,
pp. 70-74.
Gass, Tyler E., 1984. Methodology for monitoring wells;
Water Well Journal, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 30-31.
Gibb, James P., 1987. How drilling fluids and grouting
materials affect the integrity of ground water samples from
monitoring wells, opinion I; Ground Water Monitoring
Review, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 33-35.
Gillham, R.W., M.L. Robin, J.F. Barker and J.A. Cherry,
1983. Groundwater monitoring and sample bias; API
Publication 4367, Environmental Affairs Department,
American Petroleum Institute, Washington D.C., 206 pp.
Hackett, Glen, 1987. Drilling and constructing monitoring
wells with hollow-stem augers, part I: drilling
considerations; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 7,
no. 4, pp. 51-62.
Hackett, Glen, 1988. Drilling and constructing monitoring
wells with hollow-stem augers, part II: monitoring well
installation; Ground Water Monitoring Review, vol. 8, no.
1, pp. 60-68.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987a. Monitoring well
installation, purging and sampling techniques part 1:
conceptualizations; Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 300-
313.
Keely, Joseph F. and Kwasi Boateng, 1987b. Monitoring well
installation, purging, and sampling techniques part 2: case
histories; Ground Water, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 427-439.
Mcray, Kevin B., 1986. Results of survey of monitoring well
practices among ground water professionals; Ground Water
Monitoring Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 37-38.
Minning, Robert C., 1982. Monitoring well design and
installation; Proceedings of the Second National
Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and Ground Water
Monitoring; Columbus, Ohio, pp. 194-197.
Mobile Drilling Co., 1982. Auger tools and accessories product
literature; Indianapolis, Indiana, 26 pp.
Mobile Drilling Company, 1983. Mobile drill product catalog;
Indianapolis, Indiana 37 pp.
Perry, Charles A. and Robert J. Hart, 1985. Installation of
observation wells on hazardous waste sites in Kansas using
a hollow-stem auger; Ground Water Monitoring Review,
vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 70-73.
Ramsey, Robert J.. James M, Montgomery and George E.
Maddox, 1982. Monitoring ground-water contamination
in Spokane County, Washington; Proceedings of the
162
-------
Second National Symposium on Aquifer Restoration and
Ground Water Monitoring, Columbus, Ohio, pp. 198-204.
Richter, Henry R. and Michael G. Collentme, 1983. Will my
monitoring wells survive down there?: design and
installation techniques for hazardous waste studies;
Proceedings of the Third National Symposium on Aquifer
Restoration and Ground Water Monitoring, Columbus,
Ohio, pp. 223-229.
Riggs, Charles 0., 1983. Soil Sampling in the vadose zone;
Proceedings of the NWWA/U.S. EPA Conference on
Characterization and Monitoring of the Vadose
(Unsaturated) Zone, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 611-622.
Riggs, Charles O., 1986. Exploration for deep foundation
analyses; Proceedings of the International Conference on
Deep Foundations, Beijing, China, volume II, China
Building Industry Press, Beijing, China, pp. 146-161.
Riggs, Charles O., 1987. Drilling methods and installation
technology for RCRA monitoring wells; RCRA Ground
Water Monitoring Enforcement Use of the TEGD and
COG, RCRA Enforcement Division, Office of Waste
Programs Enforcement, united States Environmental
Protection Agency, pp. 13-39.
Riggs, Charles O., and Allen W. Hatheway 1988. Ground-
water monitoring field practice - an overview; Ground-
Water Contamination Field Methods, Collins and Johnston
editors, ASTM Publication Code Number 04-963000-38,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pp. 121-136.
Scalf, M.R., J.F. McNabb, W.J. Dunlap, R.L. Cosby and J.
Fryberger, 1981. Manual of ground-water sampling
procedures; National Water Well Association, 93 pp.
Schmidt, Kenneth D., 1986. Monitoring well drilling and
sampling in alluvial basins in arid lands; Proceedings of the
Conference on Southwestern Ground Water Issues, Tempe,
Arizona, National Water Well Association, Dublin, Ohio,
pp. 443-455.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
Ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, Office
of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, OSWER-
99501.1, United States Environmental Protection Agency,
317pp.
163
-------
Appendix B
Matrices for Selecting Appropriate Drilling Equipment
The most appropriate drilling technology for use at a
specific site can only be determined by evaluating both the
hydrogeologic setting and the objectives of the monitoring
program. The matrices presented here were developed to assist
the user in choosing an appropriate drilling technology. These
matrices address the most prevalent hydrogeologic settings
where monitoring wells are installed and encompass the drilling
technologies most often applied. The matrices have been devel-
oped to act as guidelines; however, because they are subjective,
the user is invited to make site-specific modifications. Prior to
using these matrices, the prospective user should review the
portion in Section 4 entitled "Selection of Drilling Methods for
Monitoring Well Installation."
Several general assumptions were used during develop-
ment of the matrices. These are detailed below:
1) Solid-flight auger and hollow-stem auger drilling
techniques are limited to a practical drilling depth
of 150 feet in most areas based on the equipment
generally available;
2) Formation samples collected:
a) during drilling with air rotary, air rotary with
casing hammer and dual-wall air rotary tech-
niques are assumed to be from surface dis-
charge of the circulated sample;
b) during drilling with solid-flight augers, hol-
low-stem augers, mud rotary or cable tool
techniques are assumed to be taken by stan-
dard split-spoon (ASTM Dl 586) or thin-
wall (ASTM D1587) sampling techniques to
a depth of 150 feet at 5-foot intervals;
c) below 150 feet, during mud rotary drilling
are assumed to be circulated samples taken
from the drilling mud at the surface dis-
charge; and
d) below 150 feet, during cable-tool drilling are
assumed to be taken by bailer.
If differing sampling methodologies are employed,
the ratings for reliability of samples, cost and time
need to be re-evaluated. (Wireline or piston
sampling methods are available for use with
several drilling techniques; however, these
methods were not included in the development of
the matrices);
3) Except for wells installed using driving and jetting
techniques, the borehole is considered to be no
less than 4 inches larger in diameter than the
nominal diameter of the casing and screen used to
complete the well (e.g., a minimum 6-inch
borehole is necessay for completion of a 2-inch
diameter cased well);
4) Artificial filter pack installation is assumed in all
completions except for wells installed using
driving and jetting techniques;
5) The development of ratings in the matrices is
based on the largest expressed casing diameter in
each range listed in the "General Hydrogeologic
Conditions & Well Design Requirements"
statement;
6) For purposes of the "General Hydrogeologic
Conditions & Well Design Requirements air is
not considered as a drilling fluid; and
7) In the development of the dual-wall rotary
technique ratings in the matrices, air is consider-
to be the circulation medium.
Each applicable drilling method that can be used in the
described hydrogeologic setting and with the stated specific
design requirements has been evaluated on a scale of 1 to 10
with respect to the criteria listed in the matrix. A total number
for each drilling method was computed by adding the scores for
the various criteria. The totals represent a relative indication of
the desirability of drilling methods for the specified conditions.
165
-------
INDEX TO MATRICES 1 THROUGH 40
Matrix
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
i
in
5
i
g
Q.
o
10
T-
A
3
^
01
oi
.2
Q
o
Si
o
-C
I
CM
V
166
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 1
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted: casing diameter 2 inches or less; total
well depth O to 15 feet.
\ z «
\ 00
\ uT O
\ 3j
\ li
\ °"J
\ ^ 5E
^v ~~
\ ^" U-
\ m it
\ t
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
XI
o
c.
1
C
^
D
O
ro
>
1
1
9
3
10
8
NA
7
7
9
>.
—
o
ro
'^
10
10
10
9
9
10
NA
4
1
7
_«.
Hi
g c
o E
«f
C 0)
'-\ >
Is
tr 73
ECO
r— O
SI
re S
II
5
5
5
10
10
7
NA
6
6
4
o
|c
II
o c
0) O
(- O
Dl —
•~ ^
™ ^^
J^ ro
_ ^
ir a)
^ «
< ol
9
5
1
4
8
4
NA
9
10
^_
Q)
^J
ro
a
c
gi
VI
OJ
Q
s:
m
in
_c
o
< 'o
6
1
1
5
10
10
NA
10
10
c
o
a>
a.
E
o
0
"5
o ^
ni E
en O-
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 2
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 inchesor less; total
well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ z w
\ p°
\ ^ ^
\ 3 ^"
\ ~^ !•£
\ ^ *
\ u«
\ oc -•
\ oc
\ 1°
\ !-• ®
\
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
TJ
o
£
3
O>
c
Q
Q
^*
1
0)
NA
1
1
3
8
10
NA
8
10
9
>-
.5
To
CC
"a
E
<^
NA
I
I
3
9
10
NA
5
8
10
CO
8
Ol
'C
o
I
n
a>
CE
NA
4
5
2
8
10
NA
7
7
5
c
Q>
E
Q.
'5
iff
o>
i=
D
B
>,
+z
!a
'5
>
NA
10
10
9
9
10
NA
4
i
7
a> <<-
$ ^
w 0)
O £
it
£ u
IS
EC-O
0) C
•— c
1- O
.>s
m ™
d) "2
*
O C
•5 o
ll
0 C
0) O
HO
CT —
= 2
'^ CD
Oz
I?
-^ Q)
1?
< Q.
NA
5
1
4
8
4
NA
8
9
10
aj
0)
E
a
Q
c
8
1
c
t.=
I!
< 0
NA
1
1
8
8
10
NA
10
10
10
c
o
cu
a
E
o
O
$ -
li
V) Q.
Ill ~Q!
•^Q
CC (0
NA
7
1
1
9
4
'NA
9
8
10
TOTAL
NA
30
23
37
67
67
NA
60
63
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. As the depth increases from 15 to 150 feet, the limit of hollow-stem auger equipment is approached. The actual limit varies with
geologic conditions, specific equipment capability and borehole size (both outside diameter and inside diameter) requirements.
Hollow-stem auger techniques are favored for shallower depths, with mud rotary being favored as the depth increases.
5. Where dual-wall air techniques are used, completion is through the bit.
168
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 3
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less; total
well depth greater than 150 feet.
' F3TT
-o
\ = *
\ ""* s
\ II
\ — O
\ 5g
\ o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
S
5
O)
c
Q
"o
Versatility
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
8
10
9
>,
'Jo
"5
S E
If
li
cc -o
c
CC (0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
1 0
10
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
61
NA
60
69
62
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exertin9 si9"ificant influence °" the choice °f drilli"9
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction
4. Where dual-wall air techniques are used, completion is through the bit.
5. Depths greater than 150 feet limit technique choices.
169
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 4
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth O to 15 feet.
\ p°
\ ^ LU
\ "^ 5
\ ^
\ m Z
\ °*
\ ~ °
\ SO
\
\o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
T3
o
£
"gj
0)
C
Q
"o
^
j=
CD
CD
NA
1
1
\
8
7
NA
8
10
10
>,
5
.25
DC
0)
Q.
CO
t/)
NA
1
1
4
10
10
NA
5
8
10
to
o
O
O)
,c
o
>
i
NA
10
8
7
7
7
NA
6
5
5
c
0>
E
Q.
'3
O"
LU
C
O
"o
.^^
'B
CO
I
NA
10
10
9
9
10
NA
4
1
7
0>
5 c
i_ 0)
5 E
"S 5
II
cc -a
0) c
1"
t- o
.lis
CO ™
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 5
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ 2§
\ =fc
\ <*
\ m°
\
\ 2 u.
\ w Jfc
\l
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
o
c.
a!
2?
en
c
Q
"o
1
o>
NA
1
1
3
5
10
NA
8
10
9
£•
1
w
Sample Reli
NA
1
1
3
10
10
NA
5
8
10
g
O
O)
c
H
Relative Dri
NA
2
3
2
8
10
NA
5
8
6
1
1
3
U)
O)
s
Q
Q
Availability i
NA
10
10
9
9
10
NA
4
1
7
0)
£ 6
•p §•
•5 I
Jo
oc -o
c w
H 0
I I
IT £
NA
1
3
7
9
10
NA
9
8
6
o
Is
1 =
& o
1— (J
1 1
'C "St
Qz
||
NA
5
1
4
8
4
NA
9
10
9
£
a
Q
c
O>
8
o
"5
?i
Ability to In
of Well
NA
1
1
2
5
10
NA
10
8
10
o
9>
a.
E
o
Tl
B «
8 Q-
a 0
ui •»
f|
NA
4
1
2
5
6
NA
10
8
10
TOTAL
NA
25
21
32
59
69
NA
60
61
65
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3, The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Four-inch casing diameter limits technique choice even though depths are 15 to 150 feet. Large diameter (I. D.) hollow-stems are
required. Solid flight augers require open-hole completion in potentially unstable materials.
5, With increasing depth, mud rotary, dual-wall rotary and cable tool techniques become favored.
171
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 6
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ 00
\ 3fc
\ > 5
\ U ^
\ o^
\ i^
\ H&
\P
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
E
£
Q>
5
a.
Q
.»_
o
ro
«
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
7
10
9
£.
i
~
cr
0)
Q.
re
CO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
8
10
8
8
c1
'~
Q
I
n
a>
cr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
5
6
3
c:
o.
CT
UJ
I
o
"5
Jt
10
5
<
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
4
1
7
fl
o E
"O o
Q) —
cc -o
c ni
jl c
ll
*o3 w
cr £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
7
6
4
o
O) «
o c
1.9
.c "o
OJ O
t- O
.E 2
™ *^
Qz
"5 »
1 *
< i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
9
10
9
o>
o>
re
Q
c
o>
8
Q
=
To
_c
x=
ll
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
10
7
10
c
o
0)
a
o
O
•5 ^
^ Q.
re o
01 -5
Is
•5 ^
OC re
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
10
8
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
66
NA
60
58
60
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Four-inch casing diameter and depths greater than 150 feet limit technique choices,
5. With increasing depth, mud rotary, dual-wall rotary and cable tool techniques become favored.
172
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 7
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth O to 15 feet.
\ ZQ
\ F°
\ 3t
\ < •£
\ m "
\ s&
\ 0
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
E
£
O)
C
Q
"5
to
S?
o>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
8
NA
8
Reliability
91
t
<0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
8
NA
10
Drilling Cost
Relative
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
6
NA
4
c
0)
Q.
cr
in
u>
c
0
Availabi
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
7
NA
7
_
1 c
£ I
Q.
^ °
£«
IS
EC -0
0) £
.ic
H 0
ji
to 2
Q) «
en £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
NA
4
0
5«
•§.2
c ~
j= T3
^5
||
|l
1 a>
< Q.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
10
NA
8
£
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 8
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ Z
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
NA
10
.-£•
"5
CO
"5
DC
0>
a
E
,5?
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
10
to
o
(J
O)
c
Q
a>
n
a>
IT
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
6
'c.
a>
a
'5
FT
w
O)
c
'^
O
^
!5
a
CO
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
7
I|
o 1
T3 o
'5 S
c?Q
EC -a
F ™
P.I
.>5
« 2
0) <2
IT £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
4
o
a> to
O c
0.2
If
a) o
o> —
= 3
-!
^ O)
j= M
< i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
NA
NA
10
oj
'Z
n
b
c
O)
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 9
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
unconsoldated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth greater than 150 feet.
DRILLING
METHODS
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA NA
10
NA
NA
NA NA
10
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
7
it
5 S
£o
EC T3
I- g
* m
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
2
O
O) I
if
CD O
I- O
0115
11
"o £
JL^
JO
're
NA
NA
NA
NA
rx £
NA
NA
NA
NA
£= CO
• — (J)
< it
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
NA
NA
NA
10
3
E
CO
5
c
O)
"co
Q
2
"en
c
O
^* "5>
I!
< 0
-•-
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
NA
NA
NA
10
c
g
0)
Q.
o
O
ID
5 —
0 «
0} ^
S Q.
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 10
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth O to 15 feet.
\
\ P °
\ 3"
\ 5
\ ui "
\ fY
\ ° J
\ ""
\o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•o
.c
0)
5
^
O)
c
Q
o
§
1
cu
NA
1
NA
1
10
NA
NA
7
7
7
Reliability
CD
Q.
E
CO
CO
NA
1
NA
1
10
NA
NA
7
8
10
*7*
O
O
en
Q
CD
ra
cu
tr
NA
10
NA
7
9
NA
NA
5
5
5
c:
CU
g.
cr
LLJ
O)
c
D
O
m
CO
>
NA
10
NA
10
10
NA
NA
4
1
7
Ic
i_ CU
£ E
^°
& -flj
•— ^
II
cr TD
i> 5
-i"
K O
§'«
n 2
CU «>
tr £
NA
6
NA
6
10
NA
NA
6
6
2
o
12
0°
£?
o c
£3
fa
il
l§
^ Q>
< i
NA
6
NA
1
9
NA
NA
10
10
9
a>
o>
03
b
c
gi
'«
cu
Q
"CD
tn
Q
f!
< 0
NA
1
NA
1
8
NA
NA
10
10
10
c
g
OJ
Q.
Q
0
—
Ease of Wei
elopment
> 2
QC
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 11
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
z w
\ 2°
\ ^ T
\ ^ f*
\ i IAJ
\ rf S
\ > o
\ ii
N. ^ OC
\ i&
\5
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Roiary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
^
\J
jn
5
o»
-C
^
Q
a-
to
1
NA
1
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
8
10
10
:=
'B
ra
'S
o:
<5
o £
•D §"
to
a: -a
H
is ^
11
NA
1
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
10
8
2
o
O tn
0 c
° °
€ c
a> o
HO
.£ *-
°z
••S"i
< i
NA
5
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
9
9
10
a>
eg
5
c
I
~
1
^*a>
< 0
NA
1
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
10
10
10
0
0)
a.
E
8
IF
0 »
si
2-1
ID
— "O
ttl
NA
7
NA
NA
7
NA
NA
10
10
10
TOTML
NA
30
NA
NA
69
NA
NA
65
64
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drillinq fluid and additives in construction.
4. As depth increases the relative advantage of hollow-stem augering decreases.
5. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
177
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 12
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted: casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ z w
\ OQ
\ Pi
\ li
\ II
\ ^ Q
\ ^ u_
\ t°
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
|
1
o>
^c
'E
O
"5
CO
w
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
10
9
~
.2
"o
ft
0)
Q.
ID
W
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
10
6
In
8
O)
jr
Q
0)
>
«
a>
cr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
7
c:
a
'5
O"
Ul
at
'C
O
•g
>,
'£
a)
1
<
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
4
10
a>
n
£ E
«l
h_ is
> JS
ra S
ai «
EC £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
6
o
>,
O) m
II
J?
£8
rj) —
c i5
S 3
SI
IS
£• a)
~ w
5 £
< a.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
10
8
S
ra
a
c
=
S
to
c
o
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
10
c
g
Well Complet
it
„ \—
7^
•^Q
-2 -o
0) C
OC CD
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
69
72
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
- Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluid,
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
178
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 13
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches;
total well depth O to 15 feet.
\ 11
\ <*
\ ^z
\ < a
\ KU-
\ t0
\g
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Walt Rotary
Cable Tool
~u
o
To
Ol
c
Q
'o
"flj
>
NA
1
NA
1
10
NA
NA
9
9
10
£.
1
JB
1
CO
NA
1
NA
1
10
NA
NA
8
8
10
To
8
O>
c
6
I
£
Q>
tr
NA
10
NA
7
10
NA
NA
5
5
6
1
E
o.
'5
O"
LU
Ol
0
"o
.f
3
£
3
<
NA
10
NA
10
10
NA
NA
4
1
7
_
1 c
k. ^
II
•1 =
•5 ^
tr£
NA
5
NA
5
10
NA
NA
6
5
4
0
fin
c
0.2
II
o>-x
c c
11
"5 9>
— S
< a
NA
1
NA
1
8
NA
NA
10
10
9
fc
E
5
01
1
1
o
i-l
s?
< 0
NA
1
NA
1
7
NA
NA
10
8
10
c
g
5
O.
E
o
o
1E
•5 g
a) t
iS •§
OJ >
Is
'S ?
DC«
NA
4
NA
9
7
NA
NA
10
8
10
TOTAL
NA
33
NA
28
72
NA
NA
62
54
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Increasing diameter is influencing choice of equipment.
5. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that span volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
179
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 14
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches;
total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ 2 W
\ 00
\ "" X
\ J«"
\ l«
\ oi
\
a:
NA
2
NA
2
10
NA
NA
8
8
7
c:
a>
Q.
S
Ol
c
Q
B
1
I
NA
10
NA
9
9
NA
NA
4
1
7
=
51
I!
|$
Is
DC 13
0) £
11
H* O
5's
co S
'a en
rr £
NA
1
NA
3
10
NA
NA
9
9
6
0
Ol a>
O c
o°
if
(U 0
HO
G 2
ll
0 ^
iH to
^ S.
< 0.
NA
6
NA
4
8
NA
NA
10
10
9
aj
i
b
c
O)
w
S
—
2
»
_c
o
< 0
NA
1
NA
2
6
NA
NA
10
6
10
0
"5.
o
O
~QJ
^H
0 *>
^ g
v) Q-
Q) ^
5 ®
!$ c
rr m
NA
4
NA
2
6
NA
NA
10
6
10
TOTAL
NA
25
NA
24
64
NA
NA
67
57
68
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
L Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe, so open-hole completion (i.e., solid-flight auger) may not be possible.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Depth range is 15 to 150 feet.
6. Increasing diameter and depth favor cable tool and air rotary with casing hammer techniques.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
180
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 15
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ OD
\ p ®
\ 3k
\ 1*
\ 2JJ
\ ^ o
\ |s
\o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
E
£
15
o>
c
Q
"5
2-
1
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
10
9
^
2
.5
1
4)
a
CO
c/5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
10
7
o
o
O)
c
a
nj
5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
•NA
NA
10
9
6
c
Q.
CT
UJ
O)
^
Q
o
!5
S
'«
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
4
10
_
«> _
5 c
w a>
£ e
E°
•- ?
M
CC -0
o
^0
rj) —
C «
•— 3
SI
II
< i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
9
QJ
15
(0
a
c
Cl
8
a
"co
B)
O
II
^i -
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
10
c
g
S>
Q.
s
i.
IE
8&
LU "5
™ -D
tr ro
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
74
70
67
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
L Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction
4. Increasing diameter and depth favor cable tool and air rotary with casing hammer techniques.
6. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
181
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 16
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth O to 15 feet.
\ z w
\ ^0
\ 3tu
\ ^ 5
\ j|
\
\5
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•§
c.
2
o>
_c
O
"5
jt
CO'
Q)
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
2-
5
.2
"55
C
0
"5
~
15
CO
•—
^
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
8
0)
5 c
o 1
*°
!>
Is
CC T3
cs £
Ic
1- 0
.11
ra S
a) ^
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
0
0)«
"o °
Jl
^cS
11
§1
^^ ^
II
$z
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
oj
0)
i
o
c
'm
75
w
2 _
•= 5
$0
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
|
"5.
E
S
1%
°|
(A Q-
CO O
Ul ^j
$ S
13
cr n
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
46
NA
NA
NA
' 6 4
NA
74
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe, so open-hole completion (i.e., solid-flight auger) may not be possible.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Maximum casing diameter exceeds practical equipment capability except for cable tool, air rotary with casing hammer and
possibly solid-flight augers.
6. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials,
182
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 17
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
V Z «
\ —o
\ II
\ ^ £3
\ ^ Z
\ BC ~
\ O j
\ rf £
\ -Q
\ *0
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
1
fl)
2
o>
c
~
0
"o
1"
e
£
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
>,
£=
!5
CO
1
Q>
Q.
tD
w
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
V)
3
O)
c
1
>
£
*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
c
4)
1
5
Ul
O)
.c
Q
lability of
5
<
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
Ic
»_ o>
**" ^
fl) —
'~ >
§"0
(jC T3
|i
P|
ii
oc S
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
0
Ii
^ Tl
O C
0 0
1- O
c ^
11
II
1 £
i
:s
CO
JC
p
l§
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
c
g
0)
Q.
O
o
"oi
§ -
B a?
sl
(0 £
•2 -D
DC
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 18
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; saturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ z «
\ p°
\ ^ ^
\ 3 H™
\ >
\ o ^
\ u-
\ 1°
\ 1°
\ o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•Q
n
<£
O)
•
Q
"5
~
CO
IE
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
X*
£
CO
~v
CC
u>
Q.
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
O
Ol
Q
>
2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
'c
Q)
E
Q.
3
O)
C
•^
Q
1
'£
CO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
* —
> c
w 0)
^ a
5 o
S° Q
OC TJ
0) C
•— c
> ™
CO 2
IB «
OC JE
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
0
oJ co
1!
«> o
^^
jfs
II
o $
< ci
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
£
CL>
CO
a
c
O)
s
Q
2
to
c
o
l!
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
c
g
4)
a
8
"tti
5 •**
li
M a.
CO O
til "5
•"!
£ o
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
80
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly saturated, with saturation exerting significant influence on the choice of drilling
technology.
2. Borehole stability problems are potentially severe.
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Maximum diameter requiring 12-inch borehole exceeds practical equipment capability for depth range except for cable tool
methods.
5. Jetting and mud rotary methods would require the addition of fluids.
6. When using cable-tool drilling in saturated formations, it is assumed that no drilling fluid needs to be added in permeable materials
and that small volumes of drilling fluid are permissible in less permeable materials.
184
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 19
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted: casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth 1O to 15 feet.
\ Z V>
\ 00
\ IE
\0
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
g Method
^c
Q
"5
2-
I
4
7
3
8
10
8
5
9
9
6
Sample Reliability
5
1
1
10
10
10
5
8
9
10
«
Relative Drilling Co
9
10
8
10
10
7
8
6
6
3
'c
TO, Equipme
Availability of Drillii
10
10
8
9
9
10
8
4
1
7
,__
is
£ E
*S
c CD
•=; >
Relative Time Reqi
Installation and De
6
6
5
10
10
8
8
3
3
1
0
|l
If
$ o
Ability of Drilling T
Preserve Natural C
9
5
1
8
10
4
7
9
9
9
o>
n
0
c
O)
S
c
o
H
< 0
6
1
1
10
10
10
8
10
10
10
c
o
ell Completi
Relative Ease of W
and Development
6
4
5
5
10
5
4
1 0
10
7
TOTAL
54
44
32
70
79
62
53
59
57
54
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
185
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 20
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ ZQ
\ CO
\ =£
\ 5
\ O ^
\ it =
\ «f ^*
\ ~ o
\ "jjt
\ f \
\
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
- Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
-o
1
O)
c
IE
Q
"o
i=
CQ
NA
1
1
8
9
10
7
10
10
9
£*
•^
_o
"tt>
g^
_tt>
Q.
I
NA
1
1
10
10
10
5
8
9
10
S
f9
D
O)
.c
'C
Q
.1
CO
NA
10
10
9
9
10
8
4
1
7
f i
it
^ d)
S" Q
OC "D
fl) C
E ™
> '^
(5 2
"5 "2
rr £
NA
6
5
10
10
8
8
7
6
2
o
5«
li
t-o
o^s
.£ 2
ol
11
< a
NA
5
1
8
10
4
7
9
9
9
a>
0)
a>
O
—
&
c
o
< 0
NA
1
1
9
9
10
9
10
10
10
c
o
"5.
|
>
r~
"o tt)
c
(/> Q.
(Q O
|jj —
$s
~ Q
NA
4
1
5
9
5
4
10
10
7
TOTAL
NA
35
24
69
76
67
56
64
61
57
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to servere (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Solid-flight and hollow-stem augers are favored to the limit of their depth capability
186
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 21
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or less;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\*~ ZOTI
00
Fi
afc
^ s
II
11
E
O
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
|
5
en
c
D
'o
~
"ai
to
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
5
9
10
9
Reliability
CD
a
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2
5
9
10
5
8
en
O
5
>
0?
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
6
6
5
£
a
'5
LLI
en
O
"o
2
'5
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
4
1
7
«
?I
o E
Time Required 1
ion and Develop
Q) -Ji
.— —
15 2
•5 «
cc £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
7
8
8
3
o
en en
7% O
f Drilling Technc
> Natural Conditi
o sj
£" v
I a>
< Q.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
8
9
10
8
t_
1
a
i5
c
en
1
3
c
t .
^*^
ll
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
10
10
10
o
"a
E
Ease of Well Co
elopment
$ iu
•So
S-o
• c
OC a
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
4
10
9
7
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
61
55
65
64
54
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to servere (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Dual-wall air completion is through the bit.
5. Air rotary with casing hammer and dual-wall air methods become relatively more advantageous under these conditions.
187
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 22
General Hydrogeologic Conditions& Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth O to 15 feet.
z m
\ oo
\ ^ ^5
\ 11
\ ^ ft
\ *" z
\ £ —
\ -°
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
^
.c
^J
2
O)
.c
Q
Versatility of 1
NA
1
1
8
10
8
5
9
9
8
>.
=
CO
i
0)
Q.
I
NA
1
1
10
10
10
5
8
9
10
^
o
O
c
Relative Drilli
NA
10
4
10
10
7
8
5
6
3
^
c
s&
tz -o
_. c-
Relative Time
Installation ai
NA
5
5
10
10
8
8
5
5
5
o
"o --
c S
.c -o
0 C
0) O
I- O
c* 2
Ability of Dril
Preserve Nati
NA
5
1
8
10
4
7
9
9
9
^
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 23
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ 1°
\ =w
\ >s
\ li
\s
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
E
£
Ol
O
'o
1
I
NA
1
1
3
7
10
5
10
10
9
Reliabili
CD
Q.
CO
NA
1
1
10
10
10
5
8
9
10
8
o
en
c
=
6
0)
of
O)
DC
NA
1
1
10
10
10
8
6
6
4
'c
I
a
'5
cr
Ul
I
O
"o
.£•
'£
£
1
NA
10
10
9
9
10
8
4
1
7
» ^
o E
if
|i
»i
Is
H 0
||
•5 «
DC £
NA
2
3
8
10
9
8
8
8
7
o
O) «
O c
B°
I?
£.3
O)T5
c 2
= 2
i ™
Qz
>.|
< i
NA
5
1
8
10
4
7
9
9
9
0)
CO
Q
c
g>
O
5
tn
>-|
< 0
NA
1
1
6
8
10
6
10
10
10
c
is
D.
E
o
O
iE
I!
ca O
LU *Q)
II
OC co
NA
4
1
5
8
5
4
10
9
10
TOT/AL
NA
25
19
59
72
68
51
65
62
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to servere (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Solid flight augers require open hole completion, which may or may not be feasible.
189
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 24
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches; total
well depth greater than 150 feet,
\ Z 0
\ ii
\ < s
\ uiO
\1
\ O
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
„
.c
01
c
Q
^5
(5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
5
9
10
9
Reliability
CD
a
ra
W
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
3
9
10
5
„
1
D)
a
I
4>
CC
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
6
6
4
c
41
Q
3
111
O)
Q
~0
3
'to
<
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
4
1
7
a>
§|
o 1
If
II
a: -a
a> c
.ic
HO
> £
ra «
•5 «
tr £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
9
10
8
10
3
o
•§.!
.iS
o c
0) O
1-0
||
§1
B ¥
Ii
< Q-
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
8
9
10
8
0)
a
Q
c
O)
8
o
1
tn
_c
.2-i
< "o
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
10
10
10
1
0)
a
E
o
O
Ease of Wei
elopment
|l
5 =
CC CO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
4
10
8
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
58
58
65
65
56
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
Z. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Air rotary method requires generally very difficult open-hole completion. The borehole may, however, be stabilized with fluid after
drilling is complete.
190
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 25
General Hydrogeologic Condtions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth 0 to 15 feet.
\ z w
\ p°
\ §i-
\ >0
\ z
\ si
\ ,
:=
.Q
re
'«
cc
0>
Q.
1
NA
NA
NA
8
10
10
5
7
NA
10
^
O
o
CJ>
c
~
Q
0>
~
re
0)
CC
NA
NA
NA
10
10
7
9
6
NA
3
c
E
Q.
,t
o>
.c
Q
'o
S
to
1
NA
NA
NA
9
9
10
8
4
NA
7
_
5 ~
§ c
i- 0)
^ "m
u
cc n
C ^
P§
>i
ra 2
15 «
cc £
NA
NA
NA
10
9
8
8
8
NA
4
o
!;«
.c ''O
O C
t- o
CD'S
.E 5
7-^ ^3
'•— ^S
DZ
^
-2* (!)
< a
NA
NA
NA
8
8
5
4
10
NA
10
aj
S
re
5
c
o>
'(A
&
—
to
to
o
£^
1!
NA
NA
NA
7
7
10
5
10
NA
10
§
5
Q.
J
|_
*0 ^
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 26
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated unsaturated: invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ z
\ O
\ «( -^
\ 3«"
\ ^ 2^
\ "^ 5
\ S Ij
\ £ —
\ So
\ ^ 1L
\ K °
\ f i
\
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary-
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
|
^J
O)
C
a
^
=
to
(0
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
8
x
5
n
13
01
Q.
CO
OT
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
10
0
0
O)
c
•S
Q
.1
'a
0)
ft
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
6
c:
0)
E
Oi
'5
CT
UJ
O)
.C
^
Q
o
>•
15
_<5
'5
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
7
__
"5
5 c
i_ 0>
o £
~" OL
»%
i_ Q>
'5 S
^S
OC -D
m C
E ™
ll
'^ ^
co S
"5 <»
ct £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
5
o
!>«
0.2
c •$
Q) Q
01 —
c 5
'C m
QZ
I?
ff to
< i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
NA
NA
NA
10
o>
Q)
CO
Q
C
O)
(O
Q
2
V)
_c
o
^* "^
1?
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
10
Q
"a.
E
o
O
"QJ
§ £
°|
CO O
LU ~v
"™ O
CC co
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
NA
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
70
NA
NA
NA
66
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to servere (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Diameter of borehole, and depth, eliminates most options.
5. Air rotary with casing hammer and dual-wall rotary are applicable for 4-inch casing.
192
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 27
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches; total
well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ir" z 52
°S
r. o
11
N
M
\ |S
\o
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
rilling Method
Versatility of D
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
8
>.
fl
Sample Reliab
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
NA
10
"«
o
O
Ol
Relative Drillin
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
6
c
I)
Drilling Equipm
Availability of
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
7
to
b
c
O)
8
o
"m
Ability to Insti
of Well
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
NA
10
c
o
^
0)
0.
o
O
1.
°£
Relative Ease
and Developr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
NA
NA
NA
10
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
66
NA
NA
NA
65
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1.
Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual,
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g., dense, silt/clay) to servere (e.g., coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Diameter of borehole, and depth, eliminates most options.
relatively isolated, saturated
193
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 28
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or
less; total well depth O to 15 feet.
\ ZQ
\ p O
\ "* f
\ ^ lij
\ < S
\ > O
\ Z
\ **• ~
\p
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS
\
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•o
o
£
•£
Versatility of Drillinc
4
7
NA
8
8
NA
5
9
10
NA
5
1
NA
10
10
NA
5
8
9
NA
^rt
Relative Drilling Coi
9
10
NA
10
10
NA
8
6
6
NA
c
._
D
s
O)
Availability of Drillin
10
10
NA
9
9
NA
8
4
1
NA
=
5 tE
o £
Q.
w "3
Relative Time Requi
Installation and Devi
5
6
NA
10
10
NA
8
3
8
NA
o
>.
o* c
o.?
'o c
Ability of Drilling Te
Preserve Natural Co
9
5
NA
8
8
NA
7
9
10
NA
L.
1
a
O
c
Ability to Install Des
of Well
6
1
NA
10
10
NA
8
10
10
NA
o
0
Q.
E
o
O
Relative Ease of Wei
and Development
6
4
NA
5
10
NA
4
10
10
NA
TOTAL
54
44
NA
70
75
NA
5 3
59
84
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Jetting, mud rotary and cable tool methods would require the addition of fluid.
5. Air rotary with casing hammer requires driving 6-inch or greater diameter casing and completion by pullback
6. Air rotary, hand auger and solid-flight auger completion possible only if unsupported borehole is stable.
194
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 29
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or
less; total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ z w
\ 2°
\ it
\ ^1
\ o -^
\ ^i
\ oc I.
\ ^ s
\ l» >J
\ c
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
^
I
cf
n
,^_
O
>,
^
CO
>
NA
1
NA
9
10
NA
7
10
10
NA
3
,2
"o>
a
(D
CO
NA
1
NA
10
10
NA
5
8
9
NA
1
CJ
_c
w
'C
O
Q>
•&
"5
DC
NA
7
NA
10
10
NA
8
6
6
NA
4~
C
a>
Q.
5
O)
|
o
>*
•—
3
S
(0
>
**
NA
10
NA
10
10
NA
8
4
1
NA
=:
0>
?1
II
2. (D
tt T3
a> 5
E *
.£ c
H g
o -^
~ ^
•5 «
tr S
NA
6
NA
9
10
NA
8
6
9
NA
o
!«
o c
0) O
H O
'^ ^5
o z
O 5
••= s
ll
NA
5
NA
8
10
NA
7
9
9
NA
^_
Q)
(0
5
c
f
o
~n
o)
c
o
^* d)
5 ^
< 0
NA
1
NA
9
9
NA
9
10
10
NA
c
g
"o.
0
o
1
ll
tf) O-
(o o
uu -3;
S S
= Q
•2 T3
rr n
NA
4
NA
5
10
NA
4
10
10
NA
TOTAL
NA
35
NA
70
79
NA
56
63
64
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Jetting, mud rotary and cable tool methods would require the addition of fluid.
5. Air rotary with casing hammer requires driving 6-inch or greater diameter casing and completion by pullback.
6. Air rotary and solid-flight auger completion possible only if unsupported borehole is stable.
195
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 30
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 inches or
less; total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ z«
\ O Q
\ rf -C
\ 5 *~
^v i IU
\ ^ *
\ UJ "
\ ff
\ °^
\ ^ ff
\ ^ Q
\ ff
\ UJ **"
\ ~
\ O
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•o
o
"H)
o>
•c
Q
75
.£•
^
(0
o5
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
10
10
NA
£•
!5
(0
^
tr
5
CL
w
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
9
10
NA
to
o
O
O)
c
—
•c
O
o
>
n)
"5
CC
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
8
NA
'c
•E
Q
75
>,
:•=
ra
'(0
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
4
NA
Q» ^
$ c
o £
CL
V ~
"" S
to
CC T3
P ™
.i c
*~ .9
> JS
- M
£E-
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
9
NA
o
>.
g1!?
•§ .2
c ••=
y ?
35 o
KO
c 2
— 2
'*- CO
Qz
75 y
& V
io £
< Q.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
7
9
10
NA
o>
CO
b
Q
O)
'«
0
=
(Q
to
£
0
^1
I?
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
10
NA
c
o
"jJ
"a
E
o
O
^5
5 -
75 ®
^
w ^
n o
uj a,
0) >
•s O
1 "i
£T to
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4
10
8
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
65
73
69
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. The depth requirement and the decision not to utilize drilling fluid limit equipment options.
6. Jetting, mud rotary, and cable tool methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. Air rotary with casing hammer requires driving 6-inch or greater diameter casing and completion by pullback.
7. Air rotary completion possible only if unsupported borehole is stable.
196
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 31
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted: casing diameter 2 to 4 inches;
total well depth O to 15 feet.
z
\ °s
\ p
\ Is
\ SI
\ M
\ -°
\B*
\ *
\o
DRILLING
METHODS ^
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
'co
O)
C
"o
2-
CO
CO
<5
NA
1
NA
8
10
NA
5
9
9
NA
ile Reliability
u.
E
w
NA
1
NA
10
10
N/
5
E
•
N/
ive Drilling Cost
o>
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 33
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 2 to 4 inches;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
NZ
00
u O
if
tf 3E
So
rS
3§
X U.
£
j
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
o
£
o>
^
^
O)
c
D
^_
O
i=
03
i
<£
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
9
10
NA
2-
3
eo
DC
CD
O.
eg
(73
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
9
10
NA
0
0
Ol
c
—
D
?!
S?
ai
tr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
6
6
NA
*~
C
Q)
a
13
LU
i
6
"5
2;
5
a
eg
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
6
4
NA
—
~5>
5 c
O £
i°
2^
•s >
Is
CE T3
0) C
F «
c ^
* is
-^3 ^
"5> t5
DC £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
8
10
NA
o
i«
o c
-5 o
'~
S 0
O) —
c S
= ^
QZ
0 «
2-&
< at
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
10
10
NA
^_
0)
a>
ra
Q
C
01
"S
s
2
In
C
*- _
2" 15
I!
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
10
10
NA
c
o
0)
a.
E
c5
"5>
li
en O-
m o
LU ~S
Q) >
™ Q
II
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
10
10
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
60
68
70
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. No drilling fluid, increasing depth and diameter requirements eliminate many options.
5. Air rotary with casing hammer requires driving 8-inch or greater casing and completion by pullback.
199
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 34
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth O to 15 feet.
z w
\ oo
\ £?
\
2
c
Q
"o
• —
"S
CO
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
10
NA
NA
I"
&
CO
"53
CC
(1)
a
E
£
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
10
NA
NA
«
o
O
C
o
0)
~
ss
to
CC
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
6
NA
NA
^
c
a>
E
a.
'u
cr
tu
I
Q
B
£
5
're
"*
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
6
NA
NA
0}
*~ Q.
c "5
US
Is
CE -o
0) C
E ™
> *5
•j3 ^
"S ^n
c£
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
9
NA
NA
o
>,
||
.C TJ
$ 0
i"l
= 3
si
o ^
^ fl)
^— Q}
< it
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
10
NA
NA
»_
£
£
re
O
c
O)
0)
o
•2
_c
o
£" Q)
= $
< B
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
6
10
NA
NA
c
o
IS
a.
I
B
B I
a> E
re o
LLI aj
® cu
~ Q
— TJ
DC re
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5
10
NA
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
58
71
NA
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones, Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders).
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. Diameter and no drilling fluid minimizes options
5. Jetting, mud rotary and cable tool methods would require the addition of fluid.
6. Air rotary with casing hammer requires driving 12-inch or greater diameter casing and completion by pullback.
7. Air rotary completion possible only if unsupported borehole is stable.
200
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 35
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth 15 to 150 feet.
\ z«
N O Q
\ — d
\ I
\ S
\ UJ°
\ ff Si
\ ^ ^
\ **" cc
\ — Q
\ *0
\J
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
•o
y
1
Ol
c
~
O
1
%
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
>,
~
£
Q
O)
c
§
O
.1
£
S.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
c
0)
a
'5
tr
ai
o>
=
6
'S
1
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
—
V
Zc
,- 0)
"*"" rt
1°
•— ^
°"o
a: -o
flJ C
.i c
1- 0
.11
m ~S
~Z <»
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
o
*•*
|c
7^ O
O -^
o c
a> o
I- O
c1 2
= 3
5l
0»
>-»
= «
5 ff
< a
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 36
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Unconsolidated; unsaturated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches;
total well depth greater than 150 feet.
\ Z r?
\ P°
\ 3ti
\ 2o
\ QC ™
\ ° ^
\ **s
\ S"-
\ *~ ^
\°
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
E
o>
2
O)
c
Q
'o
>-
V)
0)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
x.
=
£
cr
"a.
E
CO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
crt
0
O)
~
Q
.1
RJ
01
cr
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
'c
CD
E
Q.
'5
a
LU
O)
c
Q
"5
~
!5
JO
s
<
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
=
$ H
£ E
*— Q)
g"a
tr -o
E c
t— o
.15
CO ra
« «
DC S
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
o
O) «
o c
11
o c
CD O
1- O
c* 2
il
ii
2 £
a.
o
O
^
^ ^
o|
« §•
UJ-|
fl) >
il
IT co
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
80
NA
NA
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
L Unconsolidated formations, predominantly unsaturated, with monitoring conducted in individual, relatively isolated, saturated
zones. Drilling is through primarily unsaturated material, but completion is in a saturated zone.
2. Borehole stability problems vary from slight (e.g. dense, silt/clay) to severe (e.g. coarse gravel and boulders),
3. The anticipated use of the monitoring well prohibits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction.
4. No drilling fluid, depth and diameter requirements have eliminated options.
6. Oversize drillpipe and/or auxiliary air probably required.
6. Jetting, mud rotary and cable tool methods would require the addition of fluid.
7. Air rotary completion possible only if unsupported borehole is stable.
8. Air rotary with casing hammer unlikely to penetrate to specified depths with 12-inch diameter outer casing that is required for
8-inch diameter casing and screen completion.
9. If borehole is unstable, for 8-inch diameter casing there is no method that can be used to fulfill the requirements as stated above.
Therefore, fluid would be necessary to install the well and invasion-permitting matrices will apply.
202
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 37
General Hydrogeologic Conditions& Well Design Requirement
Consolidated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid permitted; casing diameter 4 inches or less.
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
8
NA
10
8
9
NA
10
7
10
NA
7
5
9
NA
1
6
10
NA
10
4
9
NA
10
7
10
NA
10
10
10
NA
10
8
75
NA
66
55
NA
63
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1. Consolidated formations, all types
2. The anticipated use of the monitoring well permits the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction
3. Boreholes are expected to be sufficiently stable to permit open-hole completion.
4. Core sampling will improve the relative value of the mud rotary method.
5. Where dual-wall air is available it becomes an equally preferred method with air rotary.
203
-------
workability without compromising set strength;
and
7) diatomaceous earth. Diatomaceous earth reduces
slurry density, increases water demand and
thickening time and reduces set strength.
Water used to mix neat cement should be clean, freshwater
free of oil or other organic material and the total dissolved
mineral content should be less than 2000 parts per million. A
high sulfate content is particularly undesirable (Campbell and
Lehr, 1975). If too much water is used, the grout will be
weakened and excessive shrinkage will occur upon setting. If
this occurs, the annul us will not be completely tilled after the
grouting operation. The voids in the annulus may not be seen
from the surface but may still be present along the length of the
casing (Kurt, 1983).
Mixing of neat cement grout can be accomplished manu-
ally or with a mechanical mixer. Mixing must be continuous so
that the slurry can be emplaced without interruption. The grout
should be mixed to a relatively stiff consistency and immedi-
ately pumped into the annulus. The types of pumps suggested
for use with grout include reciprocating (piston) pumps, dia-
phragm pumps, centifugal pumps or moyno-typepumps. These
pumps are all commonly used by well drilling contractors.
Neat cement, because of its chemical nature (calcium
carbonate, alumina, silica, magnesia, ferric oxide and sulfur
trioxide), is a highly alkaline substance with a pH that typically
ranges from 10 to 12. This high pH presents the potential for
alteration of the pH of water with which it comes in contact.
This alteration of pH in the ground water can subsequently
affect the representativeness of any water-quality samples
collected from the well. Because the mixture is emplaced as a
slurry, the coarse materials that comprise the filter pack around
the intake portion of a monitoring well maybe infiltrated by the
cement if the cement is placed directly on top of the filter pack,
This is particularly true of thinner slurries that are mixed with
more than 6 gallons of water per sack of cement. The cement
infiltration problem also can be aggravated if well development
is attempted prior to the time at which the cement has reached
final set.
These problems can have a severe and persistent effect on
the performance of the monitoring well in terms of yield and
sample integrity. If thin grout is placed on top of the filter pack
and infiltrates, the cement material can plug the filter pack and/
or the well intake upon setting. The presence of the high-pH
cement within the filter pack can cause anomalous pH readings
in subsequent water samples taken from the well. Dunbar et al.
(1985) reported that wells completed in low-permeability geo-
logic materials with cement placed on top of the filter pack
consistently produced samples with a pH greater than 9 for two
and one-half years despite repeated attempts at well develop-
ment. For these reasons, neat cement should not be emplaced
directly on top of the filter pack of a monitoring well. Ramsey
and Maddox (1982) have suggested that a 1 to 2-foot thick very
fine-grained sand layer be placed atop the filter pack material
prior to emplacement of the neat cement grout to eliminate the
grout infiltration potential. A 2- to 5-foot thick bentonite seal
will accomplish the same purpose, but requires additional time
to allow the bentonite to hydrate prior to cement placement.
Either or both of these procedures serve to minimize well
performance impairment and chemical interference effects
caused by the proximity of neat cement to the well intake.
Another potential problem with the use of neat cement as
an annular sealing material centers around the heat generated by
the cement as it sets. When water is mixed with any type of
Portland cement, a series of spontaneous chemical hydration
reactions occur. If allowed to continue to completion, these
reactions transform the cement slurry into a rigid solid material.
As the hydration reactions progress and the cement cures, heat
is given off as a by-product this heat is known as the heat of
hydration (Troxell et al., 1968). The rate of dissipation of the
heat of hydration is a function of curing temperature, time,
cement chemical composition and the presence of chemical
additives (Lerch and Ford, 1948). General] y, the heat of hydra-
tion is of little concern. However, if large volumes of cement are
used or if the heat is not readily dissipated (as it is not in a
borehole because of the insulating properties of geologic ma-
terials), relatively large temperature rises may result (Verbeck
and Foster, 1950). The high heats can cause the structural
integrity of some types of well casing, notably thermoplastic
casing, to be compromised. Thermoplastics characteristically
lose strength and stiffness as the temperature of the casing
increases. Because collapse pressure resistance of a casing is
proportional to the material stiffness, if casing temperatures are
raised sufficiently this can result in failure of the casing (Johnson
etal, 1980).
Molz and Kurt (1 979) and Johnson et al. (1980) studied the
heat of hydration problem and concluded:
1) peak casing temperatures increase as the grout
thickness increases. Temperature rises for casings
surrounded by 1.5 inches to 4-inches of Type I
neat cement ranged from 16°F to 45°F;
temperature rises for casings surrounded by 12
inches of grout (i.e. where washouts or caving or
collapse of formation materials into the borehole
might occur) can be in excess of 170 °F. In the
former case, plastic pipe retains a large fraction of
collapse strength, but in the latter case, some
types of plastic pipe lose a large fraction of the
collapse strength (Gross, 1970);
2) the ratio of the grout-soil interface surface area to
the volumeof grout significantly influences peak
casing temperatures. Additionally, peak
temperature rise for any casing size is nonlinear
with respect to grout thickness. Lower peak
temperatures can thus be expected for smaller-
diameter casings; and
3) peak temperatures are normally reached 8 to 10
hours after water is added to the cement, and
casing temperatures remain near their peak for
several hours before slowly returning to the
original temperature.
The use of setting time accelerators, such as calcium chlo-
ride, gypsum or aluminum powder can increase the heat of
hydration and cause casings to overheat while the grout is
curing. This temperature increase poses an increased potential
for casing failure. Both Molz and Kurt (1979) and Johnson et al.
(1980) attribute uncommon premature collapses of neat cement
grouted thermoplastic-cased wells to two factors: 1) that most
100
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 39
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Consolidated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 inches or less.
z
-o
\ 3 w
\ 5s
\ "* z
\ cc —
\ O J
\ i-
\ i°
\p
DRILLING \
METHODS \
Hand Auger
Driving
Jetting
Solid Flight
Auger
Hollow Stem
Auger
Mud Rotary
Air Rotary
Air Rotary with
Casing Hammer
Dual Wall Rotary
Cable Tool
o
£
"Z
2
0)
c
Q
'o
to
^
O
1
SS
I
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
7
NA
"o
1
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
1
NA
i
_
._ a>
:n Q.
TS o
S a)
'I-"
tjQ
DC TJ
Q> £
II
1— O
sl
"cij <"
OC £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
10
NA
l
0
"S O
"J
o c
HO
IE 3
si
*o $
£ «
< i
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8
NA
10
NA
^_
£
CO
Q
C
*cn
*
_
2
tn
c
o
= 5
< "5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
10
NA
I
c
o
0>
a
o
o
1
5-
•^ c
^r m
0 »
Q.
CO O
LU ~Z
Is
— TJ
or ra
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
10
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
74
NA
68
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
„,„
3 Boreholes are expected to be sufficiently stable to permit open hole completion.
4. Io!h mud rotary aTd cable tool methods are potentially invasive, thereby reducing opUons to air dnlhng methods.
5. Air rotary may require extra air and/or special drill pipe.
205
-------
MATRIX NUMBER 40
General Hydrogeologic Conditions & Well Design Requirements
Consolidated; invasion of formation by drilling fluid not permitted; casing diameter 4 to 8 inches.
\ §8
\ il
\
O)
c
O
"*r
O
>.
n
>
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
>-
'J5
re
'a!
OC
o>
a
re
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
B)
O
o
c
^
^-
o
a>
re
a>
OC
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
"c.
E
Q.
'5
UJ
O)
f
o
o
^,
*;
1
I
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
—
Is
i. a>
o E
it
IS
DC -D
Q) C
F
.£ c
1- 0
II
(0 JS
^) W
oc £
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
o
">•«
c? c
— o
a> o
l-O
c" 2
'^ ID
Q z
II
15
< Q-
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
a>
a>
re
Q
c
g>
'(0
0)
O
5
in
c
f,=
1 ^
< 0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
g
'a
E
o
O
n ?
IE
(/) Q.
TO O
UJ QJ
Q) ^
5 -o
OC re
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
10
NA
NA
NA
TOTAL
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
80
. NA
NA
NA
EXPLANATORY NOTES:
1, Consolidated formations, all types
2. The anticipated use of the monitoring well does not permit the use of drilling fluid and additives in construction,
3. Boreholes are expected to be sufficiently stable to permit open hole completion.
4. Both mud rotary and cable tool methods are potentially invasive, thereby reducing options to air drilling methods,
6. Air rotary may require extra air and/or special drill pipe.
206
-------
Appendix C
(Supplement to Chapter 8)
Abandonment of Test Holes, Partially Completed Wells and Completed Wells
(American Water Works Association, 1984)
Section 1.1 —General
The recommendations contained in this appendix pertain
to wells and test holes in consolidated and unconsolidated
formations. Each sealing job should be considered as an
individual problem, and methods and materials should be
determined only after carefully considering the objectives
outlined in the standard.
Section 1.2 — Wells in Unconsolidated Formations
Normally, abandoned wells extending only into consoli-
dated formations near the surface and containing water under
water-table conditions can be adequately sealed by filling with
concrete, grout, neat cement, clay, or clay and sand. In the event
that the water-bearing formation consists of coarse gravel and
producing wells are located nearby, care must be taken to select
sealing materials that will not affect the producing wells.
Concrete may be used if the producing wells can be shut down
for a sufficient time to allow the concrete to set. Clean, disin-
fected sand or gravel may also be used as fill material opposite
the waterbearing formation. The remainder of the well, espe-
cially the upper portion, should be filled with clay, concrete,
grout, or neat cement to exclude surface water. The latter
method, using clay as the upper sealing material, is especially
applicable to large diameter abandoned wells.
In gravel-packed, gravel-envelope, or other wells in which
coarse material has been added around the inner casing to
within 20 to 30 ft (6.1 to 9.1 m) of the surface, sealing outside
the casing is very important. Sometimes this scaling may
require removal of the gravel or perforation of the casing.
Section 1.3 — Wells in Creviced Formations
Abandoned wells that penetrate limestone or other creviced
or channelized rock formations lying immediately below the
surface deposits should preferably be filled with concrete,
grout, or neat cement to ensure permanence of the seal. The use
of clay or sand in such wells is not desirable because fine-
-grained fill material may be displaced by the flow of water
through crevices or channels. Alternate layers of coarse stone
and concrete may be used for fill material through the water-
producing horizon if limited vertical movement of water in the
formation will not affect the quality or quantity of water in
producing wells. Only concrete, neat cement, or grout should be
used in this type of well. The portion of the well between a point
10 to 20 ft (3.0 to 6.1 m) below and a point 10 to 20 ft (3.0 to 6.1
m) above should be sealed and a plug of sealing material formed
above the creviced formation. Clay or sand maybe used to fill
the upper part of the well to within 20 ft (6.1 m) of ground level.
The upper 20 ft (6.1 m) should be sealed with concrete or
cement grout.
Section 1.4 — Wells in Noncreviced Rock Formations
Abandoned wells encountering non-creviced sandstone or
other water-bearing consolidated formations below the surface
deposits may be satisfactorily sealed by filling the entire depth
with clay, provided there is no movement of water in the well.
Clean sand, disinfected if other producing wells nearby,
may also be used through the sandstone up to a point 10 to 20
ft (3.0 to 6.1 m) below the bottom of the casing. The upper
portion of this type of well should be filled with concrete, neat
cenent, grout or clay to provide an effective seal against
entrance of surface water. If there is an appreciable amount of
upward flow, pressure cementing or mudding may be advis-
able.
Section 1.5 —Multiple Aquifer Wells
Some special problems may develop in sealing wells
extending into more than one aquifer. These wells should be
filled and sealed in such a way that exchange of water from one
aquifer to another is prevented. If no appreciable movement of
water is encountered, filling with concrete, neat cement, grout,
or alternate layers of these materials and sand will prove
satisfactory. When velocities are high, the procedures outlined
in. Sec. 1.6 are recommended. If alternate concrete plugs or
bridges are used, they should be placed in known nonproducing
horizons or, if locations of the nonproducing horizons are not
known, at frequent intervals. Sometimes when the casing is not
grouted or the formation is noncaving, it may be necessary to
break, slit, or perforate the casing to fill any annular space on the
outside.
Section 1.6 — Wells with Artesian Flow
The sealing of abandoned wells that have a movement
between aquifers or to the surface requires special attention.
Frequently the movements of water maybe sufficient to make
sealing by gravity placement of concrete, cement grout, neat
cement, clay or sand impractical. In, such wells, large stone
aggregate (not more than one third of the diameter of the hole),
lead wool, steel shavings, a well packer, or a wood or cast-lead
plug or bridge will be needed to restrict the flow and thereby
permit the gravity placement of sealing material above the
formation producing the flow. If preshaped or precast plugs are
used, they should be several times longer than the diameter of
the well, to prevent tilting.
Since it is very important in wells of this type to prevent
circulation between formations, or loss of water to the surfaces
or to the annular space outside the casing, it is recommended
that pressure cementing, using the minimum quantity of water
that will permit handling, be used. The use of pressure mudding
instead of this process is sometimes permissible.
207
-------
In wells in which the hydrostatic head producing flow to
the surface is low, the movement of water maybe arrested by
extending the well casing to an elevation above the artesian-
pressure surface. Previously described sealing methods suit-
able to the geologic conditions can then be used.
Section 1.7 — Sealing Materials
A number of materials that can be used for sealing wells
satisfactorily, including concrete, cement grout, neat cement,
clay, sand, or combinations of these materials, are mentioned
in this appendix. Each material has certain characteristics and
distinctive properties; therefore, one material may be especially
suited for doing a particular job. The selection of the material
must be based on the construction of the well, the nature of the
formations penetrated, the material and equipment available,
the location of the well with respect to possible sources of
contamination, and the cost of doing the work.
Concrete is generally used for filling the upper part of the
well or water-bearing formations, for plugging short sections of
casings, or for filling large-diameter wells. Its use is cheaper
than neat cement or grout, and it makes a stronger plug or seal.
However, concrete will not penetrate seams, crevices, or in-
terstices. Furthermore, if not properly placed, the aggregate is
likely to separate from the cement.
Cement grout or neat cement and water are far superior for
sealing small openings, for penetrating any annular space
outside of casings, and for falling voids in the surrounding
formation. When applied under pressure, they are strongly
favored for sealing wells under artesian pressure or those
encountering more than one aquifer. Neat cement is generally
preferred to grout because it does not separate.
Clay, as a heavy mud-laden or special clay fluid applied
under pressure, has most of the advantages of cement grout. Its
use is preferred by some competent authorities particularly for
sealing artesian wells. Others feel that it may, under some
conditions, eventually be carried away into the surrounding
formations.
Clay in a relatively dry state, clay and sand, or sand alone
may be used advantageously as sealing materials, particularly
under water-table conditions where diameters are large, depths
are great, formations are caving, and there is no need for
achieving penetration of openings in casings, liners, or for-
mations, or for obtaining a watertight seal at any given spot.
Frequently combinations of these materials are necessary.
The more expensive materials are used when strength, penetra-
tion, or watertightness are needed. The less expensive materials
are used for the remainder of the well. Cement grout or neat
cement is now being mixed with bentonite clays and various
aggregates. Superior results and lower cost are claimed for such
mixtures.
Reference
American Water Works Association, 1984. Appendix I:
Abandonment of test holes, partially completed wells and
completed wells; American Water Works Association
Standard for Water Wells, American Water Works
Association, Denver, Colorado, pp. 45-47.
208
-------
Glossary
Abandonment
The complete sealing of a well or borehole with grout or
other impermeable materials to restore the original
hydrogeologic conditions and/or to prevent contamination of
the aquifer.
Absorption
The penetration or apparent disappearance of molecules or
ions of one or more substances into the interior of a solid or
liquid. For example, in hydrated bentonite, the planar water that
is held between the mica-like layers is the result of absorption
(Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Accelerator
Substances used to hasten the setting or curing of cement
such as calcium chloride, gypsum and aluminum powder.
Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS)
A thermoplastic material produced by varying ratios of
three different monomers to produce well casing with good heat
resistance and impact strength.
Adapter
A device used to connect two different sizes or types of
threads, also known as sub, connector or coupling (Ingersoll-
Rand, 1985).
Adsorption
The process by which atoms, ions or molecules are held to
the surface of a material through ion-exchange processes.
Advection
The process by which solutes are transported with and at
the same rate as moving ground water.
Air Rotary Drilling
A drilling technique whereby compressed air is circulated
down the drill rods and up the open hole. The air simultaneously
cools the bit and removes the cuttings from the borehole.
Air Rotary with Casing Driver
A drilling technique that uses conventional air rotary
drilling while simultaneously driving casing. The casing driver
is installed in the mast of a top-head drive air rotary drilling rig.
Aliphatic Hydrocarbons
A class of organic compounds characterized by straight or
branched chain arrangement of the constituent carbon atoms
joined by single covalent bonds with all other bonds to hydro-
gen atoms.
Alkalinity
The ability of the salts contained in the ground water to
neutralize acids. Materials that exhibit a pH of 7 or greater are
alkaline. High-pH materials used in well construction may have
the potential to alter ambient water quality.
Aluminum Powder
An additive to cement that produces a stronger, quick-
setting cement that expands upon curing.
Anisotropic
Having some physical property that varies with direction
(Driscoll, 1986).
Annular Sealant
Material used to provide a positive seal between the bore-
hole and the casing of the well. Annular sealants should be
impermeable and resistant to chemical or physical deteriora-
tion.
Annular Space or Annulus
The space between the borehole wall and the well casing,
or the space between a casing pipe and a liner pipe.
Aquifer
A geologic formation, group of formations, or part of a
formation that can yield water to a well or spring.
Aquifer Test
A test involving the withdrawal of measured quantities of
water from or addition of water to a well and the measurement
of resulting changes in head in the aquifer both during and after
the period of discharge or addition (Driscoll, 1986).
Aquitard
A geologic formation, or group of formations, or part of a
formation of low permeability that is typically 'saturated but
yields very limited quantities of water to wells.
Aromatic Hydrocarbons
A class of unsaturated cyclic organic compounds contain-
ing one or more ring structures or cyclic groups with very stable
bonds through the substitution of a hydrogen atom for an
element or compound.
Artesian Well
A well deriving water from a confined aquifer in which the
water level stands above the ground surface; synonymous with
flowing artesian well (Driscoll, 1986).
209
-------
Artificial Filter Pack
See Grovel Pack.
Attenuation
The reduction or removal of constituents in the ground
water by the sum of all physical, chemical and biological events
acting upon the ground water.
Auger Flights
Winding metal strips welded to the auger sections that
carry cuttings to the surface during drilling.
Backwash (Well Development)
The surging effect or reversal of water flow in a well that
removes fine-grained material from the formation surrounding
the borehole and helps prevent bridging (Driscoll, 1986).
Backwashing
A method of filter pack emplacement whereby the filter
pack material is allowed to fall freely through the annulus while
clean fresh water is simultaneously pumped down the casing.
Bailer
A long, narrow bucket-like device with an open top and a
check valve at the bottom that is used to remove water and/or
cuttings from the borehole.
Bailing (Well Development)
A technique whereby a bailer is raised and lowered in the
borehole to create a strong outward and inward movement of
water from the borehole to prevent bridging and to remove fine
materials.
Barium Sulfate
A natural additive used to increase the density of drilling
fluids.
Bentonite
A hydrous aluminum silicate available in powder,
granular or pellet form and used to provide a tight seal between
the well casing and borehole. Bentonite is also added to drilling
fluid to impart specific characteristics to the fluid.
Biodegradation
The breakdown of chemical constituents through the bio-
logical processes of naturally occuring organisms.
Bit
The cutting tool attached to the bottom of the drill stem. Bit
design varies for drilling in various types of formations and
includes roller, cone and drag-type bits.
Bit, Auger
Used for soft formations with auger drill (Ingersoll-Rand,
1985).
Borehole
A hole drilled or bored into the earth, usually for explor-
atory or economic purposes, such as a water well or oil well
(united States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Borehole Geophysics
Techniques that use a sensing device that is lowered into a
borehole for the purpose of characterizing geologic formations
and their associated fluids. The results can be interpreted to
determine lithology, geometry Resistivity, bulk density,pcmsity,
permeability, and moisture content and to define the source,
movement, and physical/chemical characteristics of ground
water (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Bridge Seal
An artificial plug set to seal off specific zones in the
abandonment of a well.
Bridge-Slot Intake
A well intake that is manufactured on a press from flat
sheets that are perforated, rolled and seam welded where the
slots are vertical and occur as parallel openings longitudinally
aligned to the well axis.
Bridging
The development of gaps or obstructions in either grout or
filter pack materials during emplacement. Bridging of particles
in a naturally developed or artificial gravel pack can also occur
during development.
Cable Tool Drilling
A drilling technique whereby a drill bit attached to the
bottom of a weighted drill stem is raised and dropped to crush
and grind formation materials.
Calcium Chloride
A soluble calcium salt added to cement slurries to acceler-
ate the setting time, create higher early strength and to minimize
movement of the cement into zones of coarse material.
Calcium Hydroxide
A primary constituent of wet cement.
Caliper Logging
A logging technique used to determine the diameter of a
borehole or the internal diameter of casing through the use of a
probe with one to four spring expanding prongs. Caliper log-
ging indicates variations in the diameter of the vertical profile.
Capillary Fringe
The pores in this zone are saturated but the pressure heads
are less than atmospheric.
Casing
An impervious durable pipe placed in a well to prevent the
borehole walls from caving and to seal off surface drainage or
undesirable water, gas, or other fluids and prevent their en-
trance into the well. Surface or temporary casing means a
temporary casing placed in soft, sandy or caving surface forma-
tion to prevent the borehole from caving during drilling. Pro-
tective casing means a short casing installed around the well
casing. Liner pipe means a well casing installed without driving
within the casing or open borehole.
210
-------
Casing, Flush-Coupled
Flush-coupled casing is joined with a coupling with the
same outside diameter as the casing, but with two female
threads. The inside diameterof the coupling is approximately 3/
16 inch smaller than that of the casing. Flush-coupled casing
has thinner walls than flush-joint casing (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Casing, Flush-Joint
Flush-joint casing has a male thread at one end and a female
thread at the other. No coupling is used (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Casing Driver
A device fitted to the top-head drive of a rotary rig that is
used to advance casing into the subsurface.
Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC)
The measure of the availability of cations that can be
displaced from sites on surfaces or layers and which can be
exchanged for other cations. For geologic materials, CEC is
expressed as the number of milliequivalents of cations that can
be exchanged in a sample with a dry mass of 100 grams.
Cement
A mixture of calcium aluminates and silicates made by
combining lime and clay while heating and which is emplaced
in the annular space to form a seal between the casing and the
borehole.
Cement Bond Log
A logging device that uses acoustical signals to determine
the integrity of the cement bond to the casing.
Cement, Quick-Setting
Cement of special composition and freeness of grind that
sets much quicker than ordinary cement. This cement is used for
deviating holes and plugging cavities (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Cementing
The emplacement of a cement slurry by various methods so
that it fills the space between the casing and the borehole wall
to a prdetermined height above the bottom of the well. This
secures the casing in place and excludes water and other fluids
from the borehole.
Center Plug
A plug within the pilot assembly of a hollow-stem auger
that is used to prevent formation materials from entering the
stem of the lead auger during drilling.
Center Rod
A rod attached to the pilot assembly that facilitates removal
from the lead end of the hollow-stem auger.
Centralizer
Spring-loaded guides that are used to center the casing in
the borehole to ensure effective placement of filter pack or
grout.
Check Valve
Ball and spring valves on core barrels, rods and bailers that
are used to control water flow in one direction only.
Circulate
To cycle drilling fluid through the drill pipe and borehole
while drilling operations are temporarily suspended to condi-
tion the drilling fluid and the borehole before hoisting the drill
pipe and to obtain cuttings from the bottom of the well before
drilling proceeds (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Circulation
The movement of drilling fluid from the suction pit through
the pump, drill pipe, bit and annular space in the borehole and
back again to the suction pit. The time involved is usually
referred to as circulation time (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Circulation, Loss of
The loss of drilling fluid into the formation through crev-
ices or by infiltration into a porous media.
Clay
A plastic, soft, variously colored earth, commonly a hy-
drous silicate of alumina, formed by the decomposition of
feldspar and other aluminum silicates (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Collapse Strength
The capability of a casing or well intake to resist collapse
by any or all external loads to which it is subjected during and
after installation.
Compressive Strength
The greatest compressive stress that a substance can bear
without deformation.
Conductivity
A measure of the quantity of electricity transferred across
unit area per unit potential gradient per unit time. It is the
reciprocal of Resistivity.
Cone of Depression
A depression in the ground-water table or potentiometric
surface that has the shape of an inverted cone and develops
around a well from which water is being withdrawn. It defines
the area of influence of a well (Driscoll 1986).
Cone of Impression
A conical mound on the water table that develops in
response to well injection whose shape is identical to the cone
of depression formed during pumping of the aquifer.
Confined Aquifer
An aquifer which is bounded above and below by low-
permeability formations.
Confined Bed
The relatively impermeable formation immediately over-
lying or underlying a confined aquifer.
Contaminant
Any physical, chemical, biological or radiological sub-
stance or matter in water that has an adverse impact.
Contamination
Contamination is the introduction into ground water of any
211
-------
chemical material, organic material, live organism or radioac-
tive material that will adversely affect the quality of the ground
water.
Continuous Sampling Tube System
Thin-wall sampling tube attached in advance of the cutting
head of the hollow-stem auger that allows undisturbed samples
to be taken continuously while the augers are rotated.
Continuous Slot Wire-Wound Intake
A well intake that is made by winding and welding trian-
gular-shaped, cold-rolled wire around a cylindrical array of
rods. The spacing of each successive turn of wire determines the
slot size of the intake.
Core
A continuous columnar sample of the lithologic units
extracted from a borehole. Such a sample preserves strati-
graphic contacts and structural features (United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Core Barrel
A reaming shell and length of tubing used during air or mud
rotary drilling to collect formation samples in both consolidated
and unconsolidated formations. Core barrels may be single or
double walled and of a swivel or rigid type.
Core Lifter
A tapered split ring inside the bit and surrounding the core.
On lifting the rods, the taper causes the ring to contract in
diameter, seizing and holding the core (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Corrosion
The adverse chemical alteration that reverts elemental
metals back to more stable mineral compounds and that affects
the physical and chemical properties of the metal.
Cost-Pius Contract
Drilling contracts that list specific costs associated with
performing the work and include a percentage of those costs as
an additional amount that will be paid to perform a job.
Coupling
A connector for drill rods, pipe or casing with identical
threads, male and/or female, at each end (Ingersoll-Rand,
1985).
Cross Contamination
The movement of contaminants between aquifers or water-
bearing zones through an unsealed or improperly sealed bore-
hole.
Cutter Head
The auger head located at the lead edge of the auger column
that breaks up formation materials during drilling.
Cuttings
Formation particles obtained from a borehole during the
drilling process.
Decontamination
A variety of processes used to clean equipment that has
contacted formation material or ground water that is known to
be or suspected of being contaminated.
Dennison Sampler
A specialized sampler of a double-tube core design with a
thin inner tube that permits penetration in extremely stiff or
highly cemented unconsolidated deposits while collecting a
thin-wall sample.
Density
The weight of a substance per unit volume.
Development
The act of repairing damage to the formation caused during
drilling procedures and increasing the porosity and permeabil-
ity of the materials surrounding the intake portion of the well
(Driscoll, 1986).
Diatomaceous Earth
A cement additive composed of siliceous skeletons of
diatoms used to reduce slurry density, increase water demand
and thickening time while reducing set strength.
Differential Pressure
The difference in pressure between the hydrostatic head of
the drilling fluid-filled or empty borehole and the formation
pressure at any given depth (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Direct Mud Rotary
A drilling technique whereby a drilling fluid is pumped
down the drill rod, through the bit and circulates back to the
surface by moving up the annular space between the drill rods
and the borehole.
Dispersion
A process of contaminant transport that occurs by me-
chanical mixing and molecular diffusion.
Dissociation
The splitting up of a compound or element into two or more
simple molecules, atoms or ions. Applied usually to the effect
of the action of heat or solvents upon dissolved substances. The
reaction is reversible and not as permanent as decomposition;
that is, when the solvent is removed, the ions recombine
(Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
DNAPLS
Acronym for dense, nonaqueous-phase liquids.
Down gradient
In the direction of decreasing hydrostatic head (United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Downgradient Well
A well that has been installed hydraulically downgradient
of the site and is capable of detecting the migration of contami-
nants from a regulated unit. Regulations require the installation
212
-------
contaminant migration (United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, 1986).
Down-the-Hole Hammer
A pneumatic drill operated at the bottom of the drill pipe by
air pressure provided from the surface.
Drawdown
The extent of lowering of the water surface in a well and
water-bearing zone resulting from the discharge of water from
the well.
Drill Collar
A length of heavy, thick-walled pipe used to stabilize the
lower drill string, to minimize bending caused by the weight of
the drill pipe and to add weight to the bit.
Drill Pipe
Special pipe used to transmit rotation from the rotating
mechanism to the bit. The pipe also transmits weight to the bit
and conveys air or fluid which removes cuttings from the
borehole and cools the bit (Driscoll, 1986).
Drill Rod
Hollow flush-jointed or coupled rods that are rotated in the
borehole that are connected at the bottom to the drill bit and on
the top to the rotating or driving mechanism of a drilling rig.
Drill String
The string of pipe that extends from the bit to the driving
mechanism that serves to carry the mud down the borehole and
to rotate the bit
Drilling Fluid
A water or air-based fluid used in the well drilling opera-
tion to remove cuttings from the borehole, to clean and cool the
bit, to reduce friction between the drill string and the sides of the
borehole and to seal the borehole (Driscoll, 1986).
Drive Block
A heavy weight used to drive pipe or casing through
unconsolidated material.
Drive Couplings
Heavy-duty couplings used to join sections of heavy-wall
casing that are specifically designed to withstand the forces
during driving casing.
Drive Head
A component fastened to the top of pipe or casing to take
the blow of the drive block (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Drive Shoe
A forged steel collar with a cutting edge fastened onto the
bottom of the casing to shear off irregularities in the hole as the
casing advances. It is designed to withstand drive pressures to
protect the lower edge of the casing as it is driven (United S tales
Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Driven Well
A well that is driven to the desired depth, either by hand or
machine; may employ a wellpoint, or alternative equipment.
Drop Hammer
A weighted device used to drive samplers during drilling
and sampling.
Dual-Wall Reverse Circulation
A drilling technique whereby the circulating fluid ispumped
down between the outer casing and the inner drill pipe, through
the drill bit and up the inside of the drill pipe.
Effective Grain Size (Effective Diameter)
The particle grain size of a sample where 90 percent
represents coarser-size grains and 10 percent represents firier-
sii.e grains, i.e., the coarsest diameter in the finest 10 percent of
the sediment.
Electric Logging
Logging techniques used in fluid-filled boreholes to obtain
information concerning the porosity, permeability and fluid
contentof the formations drilled based on thedielectic properties
of the aquifer materials.
Established Grade
The permanent point of contact of the ground or artificial
surface with the casing or curbing of the well.
Established Ground Surface
The permanent elevation of the surface at the site of the
well upon completion.
Filter Cake (Mudcake)
The suspended solids that are deposited on the borehole
wall during the process of drilling.
Filter Cake Thickness (Mudcake)
A measurement, in 32nd of an inch, of the solids deposited
on filter paper during the standard 30-minute API filter test, or
measurement of the solids deposited on filter paper for a 7 1/2-
minute duration (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Filter Pack
Sand, gravel or glass beads that are uniform, clean and
well-rounded that are placed in the annulus of the well between
the borehole wall and the well intake to prevent formation
material from entering through the well intake and to stabilize
the adjacent formation.
Filter Pack Ratio
A ratio used to express size differential between the forma-
tion materials and the filter pack that typically refers to either
the average grain size (DJO) or the 70-percent (D70) retained size
of the formation material.
Filtrate Invasion
The movement of drilling fluid into the adjacent formation
that occurs when the weight of the drilling fluid substantially
exceeds the natural hydrostatic pressure of the formation.
Fixed-Price Contracts
Drilling contracts that list the manpower, materials and
additional costs needed to perform the work specified as a fixed
cost payable upon completion.
213
-------
Floaters
Light-phase organic liquids in ground water capable of
forming an immiscible layer that can float on the water table
(United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Float Shoe
A drillable valve attached to the bottom of the casing.
Flocculation
The agglomeration of finely divided suspended solids into
larger, usually gelatinous particles through electrical charge
alignment of particles.
Flow Meter
A tool used to monitor fluid flow rates in cased or uncased
boreholes using low-inertia impellers or through changes in
thermal conductance as liquids pass through the tool.
Flow-Through Well
The installation of a small-diameter well intake that pen-
etrates all or a significant portion of the aquifer. The well is
designed to minimize distortion of the flow field in the aquifer.
Fluid Loss
Measure of the relative amount of fluid lost (filtrate)
through permeable formations or membranes when the drilling
fluid is subjected to a pressure differential (Ingersoll-Rand,
1985).
Fluoropolymers
Man-made materials consisting of different formulations
of monomers molded by powder metallurgy techniques that
exhibit anti-stick properties and resistance to chemical and
biological attack.
Flush-Coupled Casing
See Casing, Flush-coupled.
Flush-Joint Casing
See Casing, Flush-joint.
F]y Ash
An additive to cement that increases sulfate resistance and
early compressive strength.
Formation
A mappable unit of consolidated material or unconsoli-
dated material characterized by a degree of lithologic homo-
geneity.
Formation Damage
Damage to the formation resulting from drilling activities
(e.g., the invasion of drilling fluids or formation of mudcake)
that alter the hydraulic properties of formation materials.
Formation Fluid
The natural fluids present in the formation or aquifer.
Formation Stabilizer (Filter Pack)
A sand or gravel placed in the annulus of the well between
the borehole and the well intake to provide temporary or long-
term support for the borehole (Driscoll, 1986).
Gel Strength
A measure of the capability of the drilling fluid to maintain
suspension of particulate matter in the mud column when the
pump is off.
Grain Size
The general dimensions of the particles in a sediment or
rock, or of the grains of a particular mineral that make up a
sediment or rock. It is common for these dimensions to be
referred to with broad terms, such as fine, medium, and coarse.
A widely used grain size classification is the Udden-Wentworth
grade scale (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986.
Gravel Pack (Artificial Filter Pack); see also Filter
Pack
A term used to describe gravel or other permeable filter
material placed in the annular space around a well intake to
prevent the movement of finer material into the well casing, to
stabilize the formation and to increase the ability of the well to
yield water.
Ground Water
Any water below the surface of the earth, usually referring
to the zone of saturation.
Grout
A fluid mixture of neat cement and water with various
additives or bentonite of a consistency that can be forced
through a pipe and emplaced in the annular space between the
borehole and the casing to form an impermeable seal.
Grouting
The operation by which grout is placed between the casing
and the wall of the borehole to secure the casing in place and to
exclude water and other fluids from moving into and through
the borehole.
Gypsum
An additive to cement slurries that produces a quick-
setting, hard cement that expands upon curing.
Halogenated Hydrocarbons
An organic compound containing one or more halogens
(e.g., fluorine, chlorine, bromine, and iodine) (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Hand Auger
Any of a variety of hand-operated devices for drilling
shallow holes into the ground.
Head LOSS
That part of potential energy that is lost because of friction
as water flows through a porous medium.
Heat of Hydration
Exothermic or heat-producing reaction that occurs during
the curing of cement.
214
-------
Perched Ground Water
Ground water in a saturated zone that is separated from the
main body of ground water by a less permeable unsaturated
zone or formation.
Percolate
The act of water seeping or filtering through materials
without a definite channel,
Permeability
A measure of the relative ease with which a porous medium
can transmit a liquid under a potential gradient (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1975).
Piezometers
Generally a small-diameter, non-pumping well used to
measure the elevation of the water table or potentiometric
surface (United States Environmental Protection Agency,
1986).
Pilot Assembly
The assembly placed at the lead end of the auger consisting
of a solid center plug and a pilot bit.
Plugs, Casing
Plug made of drillable material to correspond to the inside
diameter of the casing. Plugs are pumped to bottom of casing to
force all cement outside of casing (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Plugging
The complete filling of a borehole or well with an imper-
meable material which prevents flow into and through the
borehole or well.
Plume
An elongated and mobile column or band of a contaminant
moving through the subsurface.
Polumeric Additives
The natural organic colloids developed from the guar plant
that are used for viscosity control during drilling.
Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Thermoplastics produced by combining PVC resin with
various types of stabilizers, lubricants, pigments, fillers and
processing aids, often formulated to produce rigid well casing.
Porosity
The percentage of void spaces or openings in a consoli-
dated or unconsolidated material.
Portland Cement
Cement specified as Type I or Type 11 under ASTM C-150
standards.
Potentiometric Data
Ground-water surface elevations obtained at wells and
piezometers that penetrate a water-bearing formation.
Potentiometric Surface
An imaginary surface representing the total head of ground
water in a confined aquifer that is defined by the level to which
water will rise in a well (Driscoll, 1986).
Precipitate
Material that will separate out of solution or slurry as a
solid under changing chemical and or physical conditions.
Pressure Sealing
A process by which a grout is confined within the borehole
or casing by the use of retaining plugs or packers and by which
sufficient pressure is applied to drive the grout slurry into and
within the annular space or zone to be grouted.
Protective Casing
A string of casing set in the borehole to stabilize a section
of the formation and/or to prevent leakage into and out of the
formation and to allow drilling to continue to a greater depth.
Protectors, Thread
A steel box and pin used to plug each end of a drill pipe
when it is pulled from the borehole to prevent foreign matter or
abrasives from collecting on the greasy threads and to protect
threads from corrosion or damage while transporting or in
storage (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Puddled Clay
Puddling clay is a mixture of bentonite, other expansive
clays, tine-grained material and water, in a ratio of not less than
7 pounds of bentonite or expansive clay per gallon of water. It
must be composed of not less than 50 percent expansive clay
with the maximium size of the remaining portion not exceeding
that of coarse sand.
Pulling Casing
To remove the casing from a well.
Pumping/Overpumpinf/Backwashing
A well development technique that alternately starts and
stops a pump to raise and drop the column of water in the
borehole in a surging action.
Pump Test
A test used to determine aquifer characteristics performed
by pumping a well for a period of time and observing the change
in hydraulic head that occurs in adjacent wells. A pump test may
be used to determine degree of hydraulic interconnection between
different water-bearing units, as well as the recharge rate of a
well (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Pumping Water Level
The elevation of the surface of the water in a well or the
water pressure at the top of a flowing artesian well after a period
of pumping or flow at a specified rate.
Radioactive Logging
A logging process whereby a radioactive source is lowered
down a borehole to determine formation characteristics. Ra-
dioactive logging devices typically used for ground-water
investigations include gamma and neutron logging probes.
Radius of Influence (Cone of Depression)
The radial distance from the center of a well under pumping
217
-------
Heaving Sand
Saturated sands encountered during drilling where the
hydrostatic pressure of the formation is greater than the bore-
hole pressure causing the sands to move up into the borehole.
High-Yield Drilling Clay
A classification given to a group of commercial drilling
clay preparations having a yield of 35 to 50 bbl/ton and
intermediate between bentonite and low-yield clays. High-
yield drilling clays are usually prepared by peptizing low-yield
calcium montmorillonite clays or, in a few cases, by blending
some bentonite with the peptized low-yield clay (Ingersoll-
Rand, 1985).
Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling
A drilling technique in which hollow, interconnected flight
augers, with a cutting head, are pressed downward as the auger
is rotated.
Homogeneous
Exhibiting a uniform or similar nature.
Hydraulic Conductivity
A coefficient of proportionality that describes the rate at
which a fluid can move through a permeable medium. It is a
function of both the media and of the fluid flowing through it
(United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Hydraulic Gradient
The change in static head per unit of distance in a given
direction. If not specified, the direction generally is understood
to be that of the maximum rate of decrease in head.
Hydrostatic Head
The pressure exerted by a column of fluid, usually ex-
pressed in pounds per square inch (psi). To determine the
hydrostatic head at a given depth in psi, multiply the depth in
feet by the density in pounds per gallon by 0.052 (Ingersoll-
Rand, 1985).
Immiscible
Constituents that are not significantly soluble in water.
Incrustation (Encrustation)
The process by which a crust or coating is formed on the
well intake and/or casing, typically through chemical or bio-
logical reactions.
Induction Tool
A geophysical logging tool used to measure pore fluid
conductivity.
Inhibitor (Mud)
Substances generally regarded as drilling mud contami-
nants, such as salt and calcium sulfate, are called inhibitors
when purposely added to mud so that the filtrate from the
drilling fluid will prevent or retard the hydration of formation
clays and shales (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Isotropic
A medium whose properties are the same in all directions.
Jet Percussion
A drilling process that uses a wedge-shaped drill bit that
discharges water under pressure while being raised and lowered
to loosen or break up material in the borehole.
Kelly
Hollow steel bar that is in the main section of drill string to
which power is directly transmitted from the rotary table to
rotate the drill pipe and bit (Driscoll, 1986).
Ketones
Class of organic compounds where the carbonyl group is
bonded to two alkyl groups (United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1986).
Knock-Out Plate
A nonretrievable plate wedged within the auger head that
replaces the traditional pilot assembly and center rod that is
used to prevent formation materials from entering the hollow
auger stem.
Logging, Radioactive
The logging process whereby a neutron source is lowered
down the borehole, followed by a recorder, to determine mois-
ture content and to identify water-bearing zones.
Lost Circulation
The result of drilling fluid escaping from the borehole into
the formation by way of crevices or porous media (Driscoll,
1986).
Louvered Intake
A well intake with openings that are manufactured in solid-
wall metal tubing by stamping outward with a punch against
dies that control the size of the openings.
Low-Solids Muds
A designation given to any type of mud where high-
performing additives have been partially or wholly substituted
for commercial or natural clays (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Low-Yield Well
A relative term referring to a well that cannot recover in
sufficient time after well evacuation to permit the immediate
collection of water samples (United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1986).
Machine-Slotted Intake
Well intakes fabricated from standard casing where slots of
a predetermined width are cut into the casing at regular intervals
using machining tools.
Male and Female Threads
Now called pin and box threads, as in the oil industry
(Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Marsh Funnel
A device used to measure drilling fluid viscosity where the
time required for a known volume of drilling fluid to drain
through an orifice is measured and calibrated against a time for
215
-------
conditions to the point where there is no lowering of the water
table or potentiometric surface (Driscoll, 1986).
Reamer
A bit-like tool, generally run directly above the bit, used to
enlarge and maintain a straight borehole (After Ingersoll-Rand,
1985).
Reaming
A drilling operation used to enlarge a borehole.
Rehabilitation
The restoration of a well to its most efficient condition
using a variety of chemical and mechanical techniques that are
often combined for optimum effectiveness.
Resistivity
The electrical resistance offered to the passage of a current,
expressed in ohm-meters; the reciprocal of conductivity. Fresh-
water muds are usually characterized by high Resistivity; salt-
water muds, by low Resistivity (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Reverse Circulation
A method of filter pack emplacement where the filter pack
material is fed into the annulus around the well intake concur-
rently with a return flow of water. The water is pumped to the
surface through the casing.
In dual-wall reverse circulation rotary drilling, the circul-
ating fluid is pumped down between the outer casing and inner
drill pipe, and then up and out through the drill bit to the
surface.
Rig
The machinery used in the construction or repair of wells
and boreholes.
Rotary Table Drive
Hydraulic or mechanical drive on a rotary rig used to rotate
the drill stem and bit.
RVCM
Residual vinyl chloride monomer.
Samples
Materials obtained from the borehole during the drilling
and/or formation sampling process that provide geological
information. May also refer to water from completed well used
for hydrogeochemical analysis.
Saturated Zone (Phreatic Zone)
The subsurface zone in which all pore spaces are filled with
water.
Scheduling
Standardization of casing diameters and wall thicknesses
where wall thickness increases as the scheduling number in-
creases.
Screen
See Well Intake.
Seal
The impermeable material, such as cement grout, bento-
nite or pudded clay, placed in the annular space between the
borehole wall and the permanent casing to prevent the downhole
movement of surface water or the vertical mixing of water-
bearing zones.
Segregation
The differential settling of filter pack or other materials that
occurs in the annular space surrounding the intake during
placement by gravity (free fall).
Set Casing
To install steel pipe or casing in a borehole.
Shale Shaker
Vibratory screen connected in line to the circulation sys-
tem of a mud rotary rig through which the drilling fluid passes
and where suspended material is separated and samples are
collected.
Shelby Tube
Device used in conjunction with a drilling rig to obtain an
undisturbed core sample of unconsolidated strata (United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Sieve Analysis
Determination of the particle-size distribution of soil,
sediment or rock by measuring the percentage of the particles
that will pass through standard sieves of various sizes (Driscoll,
1986).
Single-Riser/Limited-Interval Well
An individual monitoring well installed with a limited-
length well intake that is used to monitor a specific zone of a
formation.
Sinkers
Dense-phase organic liquids that coalesce in an immiscible
layer at the bottom of the saturated zone (United States Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Slip-Fit Box and Pin Connections
A type of coupling used to join two hollow-stem auger
sections.
Slotted Couplings
A device attached to the knock-out plate at the base of the
lead auger that allows water to pass into the center of the auger
during drilling while preventing the entrance of sediment or
sand into the hollow stem.
Slotted Well Casing
Well intakes that are fabricated by cutting slots of prede-
termined width at regular intervals by machining tools.
Slug Test
A single well test to determine the in-situ hydraulic con-
ductivity of typically low-permeability formations by the in-
stantaneous addition or removal of a known quantity (slug) of
218
-------
water into or from a well, and the subsequent measurement of
the resulting well recovery (United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1986).
Slurry
A thin mixture of liquid, especially water, and any of
several finely divided substances such as cement or clay par-
ticles (Driscoll, 1986).
Smectite
A commonly used name for clay minerals that exhibit high
swelling properties and a high cation exchange capacity.
Sodium Bentonite
A type of clay added to drilling fluids to increase viscosity.
Solids Concentration or Content
The total amount of solids in a drilling fluid as determined
by distillation that includes both the dissolved and the suspended
or undissolved solids. The suspended solids content maybe a
combination of high and low specific gravity solids and native
or commercial solids. Examples of dissolved solids are the
soluble salts of sodium, calcium and magnesium. Suspended
solids make up the mudcake dissolved solids remain in the
filtrate. The total suspended and dissolved solids contents are
commonly expressed as percent by weight (Ingersoll-Rand,
1985).
Solid-Flight Auger
A solid-stem auger with a cutting head and continuous
flighting that is rotated by a rotary drive head at the surface and
forced downward by a hydraulic pulldown or feed device.
Solvation
The degradation of plastic well casing in the presence of
very high concentrations of specific organic solvents.
Solvent Cementing
A method of joining two sections of casing where solvent
is applied to penetrate and soften the casing pieces and fuses the
casing together as the solvent cement cures.
Sorption
The combined effect of adsorption and/or absorption.
Specific Capacity
The rate of discharge of water from a well per unit of
drawdown of the water level, commonly expressed in gpm/ft or
mVday/m, and that varies with the duration of discharge
(Driscoll, 1986).
Specific Yield
The ratio of the volume of water that a given mass of
saturated rock or soil will yield by gravity to the volume of the
mass expressed as a percentage (Driscoll, 1986).
Split-Spoon Sampler
A hollow, tubular sampling device driven by a 140-pound
weight below the drill stem to retrieve sample of the formation,
Spudding Beam
See Walking Beam.
Standard Dimension Ratio
A ratio expressed as the outside diameter of casing divided
by the wall thickness.
Static Water Level
The distance measured from the established ground sur-
face to the water surface in a well neither being pumped nor
under the influence of pumping nor flowing under artesian
pressure.
Surface Seal
The seal at the surface of the ground that prevents the
intrusion of surficial contaminants into the well or borehole.
Surfactant
A substance capable of reducing the surface tension of a
liquid in which it is dissolved. Used in air-based drilling fluids
to produce foam, and during well development to disaggregate
clays (Driscoll, 1986).
Surge Block
A plunger-like tool consisting of leather or rubber discs
sandwiched between steel or wooden discs that maybe solid or
valved that is used in well development.
Surging
A well development technique where the surge block is
alternately lifted and dropped within the borehole above or
adjacent to the screen to create a strong inward and outward
movement of water through the well intake.
Swivel, Water
A hose coupling that forms a connection between the slush
pumps and the drill string and permits rotation of the drill string
(Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Teflon
Trade name for fluoropolymer material.
Telescoping
A method of fitting or placing one casing inside another or
of introducing screen through a casing diameter larger than the
diameter of the screen (United States Environment Protection
Agency, 1975).
Temperature Survey
An operation to determine temperatures at various depths
in the wellbore, typically used to ensure the proper cementing
of the casing or to find the location of inflow of water into the
borehole (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Tensile Strength
The greatest longitudinal stress a substance can bear with-
out pulling the material apart.
Test Hole
A hole designed to obtain information on ground-water
quality and/or geological and hydrological conditions (United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975).
219
-------
Thermoplastic Materials
Man-made materials often used for well casing that are
composed of different formulations of large organic molecules
that are softened by heating and hardened by cooling and can be
easily molded and extruded.
Thin-Wall Samplers
A hollow tubular sampling device that is pressed into the
formation below the drill stem to retrieve an undisturbed
sample.
Top-Head Drive
A drive for the drill stem where the bottom sub of the
hydraulic drive motor is connected directly to the drill rod.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
A term that expresses the quantity of dissolved material in
a sample of water.
Transmissivity
The rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width
of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. Transmissivity
values are given in gallons per day through a vertical section of
an aquifer one foot wide and extending the full saturated height
of an aquifer under hydraulic gradient of 1 in the English
Engineering System; in the International System, transmissiv-
ity is given in cubic meters per day through a vertical section in
an aquifer one meter wide and extending the full saturated
height of the aquifer under a hydraulic gradient of 1 (Driscoll,
1986).
Tremie Method
Method whereby filter pack is emplaced or bentonite/
cement slurries are pumped uniformly into the annular space of
the borehole through the use of a tremie pipe.
Tremie Pipe
A device, usually a small-diameter pipe, that carries grout-
ing materials to the bottom of the borehole and that allows
pressure grouting from the bottom up without introduction of
appreciable air pockets (United States Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, 1975).
Turbidity
Solids and organic matter suspended in water.
Unconfined Aquifer
An aquifer not bounded above by a bed of distinctly lower
permeability than that of the aquifer and containing ground
water below a water table under pressure approximately equal
to that of the atmosphere.
Unconsolidated Formation
Unconsolidated formations are naturally-occurring earth
formations that have not been lithified; they may include
alluvium, soil, gravel, clay and overburden, etc.
Underreamer
A bit-like tool with expanding and retracting cutters for
enlarging a drill hole below the casing (Ingersoll-Rand, 1985).
Unified Soil Classification System
A standardized classification system for the description of
soils that is based on particle size and moisture content.
Uniformity Coefficient
A measure of the grading uniformity of sediment defined
as the 40-percent retained size divided by 90-percent retained
size.
Unit-Price Contracts
Drilling contracts that establish a fixed price for materials
and manpower for each unit of work performed.
Upgradient Well
One or more wells that are placed hydraulically upgradient
of the site and are capable of yielding ground-water samples
that are representative of regional conditions and are not affected
by the regulated facility (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 1986).
Vadose Zone (Unsaturated Zone)
A subsurface zone above the water table in which the
interstices of a porous medium are only partially filled with
water (United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986).
Vicksburg Sampler
A strong thin-walled sampler for use in stiff and highly
cemented Unconsolidated deposits.
Viscosity
The resistance offered by the drilling fluid to flow.
Volatile Organics
Liquid or solid organic compounds with a tendency to pass
into the vapor state (United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 1986).
Walking Beam (Spudding Beam)
The beam of a cable tool rig that pivots at one end while the
other end connected to the drill line is moved up and down,
imparting the "spudding" action of the rig.
Water Swivel
See Swivel, Water.
Water Table
The upper surface in an unconfined ground water body at
which the pressure is atmospheric (United States Environmental
Protection Agency, 1975).
Weight
Reference to the density of a drilling fluid. This is normally
expressed in either Ib/gal, Ib/cu ft, or psi hydrostatic pressure
per 1000 ft of depth.
Well
Any test hole or other excavation that is drilled, cored,
bored, washed, fractured, driven, dug, jetted or otherwise
constructed when intended use of such excavation is for the
location, monitoring, dewatering, observation, diversion, arti-
ficial recharge, or acquisition of ground water or for conducting
220
-------
pumping equipment or aquifer tests. May also refer to casing
and intake.
Well Cap
An approved, removable apparatus or device used to cover
a well.
Well Cluster
Two or more wells completed (screened) to different
depths in a single borehole or in a series of boreholes in close
proximity to each other. From these wells, water samples that
are representative of different horizons within one or more
aquifers can be collected (United States Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, 1986).
Well Construction
Water well construction means all acts necessary to obtain
ground water from wells.
Well Contractor
Any person, firm or corporation engaged in the business of
constructing, altering, testing, developing or repairing a well or
borehole.
Well Development
Techniques used to repair damage to the borehole from the
drilling process so that natural hydraulic conditions are re-
stored; yields are enhanced and fine materials are removed.
Well Evacuation
Process of removing stagnant water from a well prior to
sampling (United States Environmental Protection Agency,
1986).
Well Intake ( Well Screen)
A screening device used to keep materials other than water
from entering the well and to stabilize the surrounding forma-
tion.
Well Log
A record that includes information on well construction
details, descriptions of geologic formations and well testing or
development techniques used in well construction.
Well Point
A sturdy, reinforced well Screen or intake that can be
installed by driving into the ground.
Well Seal
An arrangement or device used to cover a well or to
establish or maintain a junction between the casing or curbing
of a well and the piping or equipment installed therein to prevent
contaminated water or other material from entering the well at
the land surface.
Well Vent
An outlet at or near the upper end of the well casing to allow
equalization of air pressure in the well.
Yield
The quantity of water per unit of time that may flow or be
pumped from a well under specified conditions.
Yield Point
A measure of the amount of pressure, after the shutdown
of drilling fluid circulation, that must be exerted by the pump
upon restating of the drilling fluid circulation to start flow.
Zone of Aeration
The zone above the water table and capillary fringe in
which the interstices are partly filled with air.
Zone of Saturation
The zone below the water table in which all of the inter-
stices are filled with ground water.
References
Bates, Robert L. and Julia A. Jackson, eds, 1987. Glossary of
geology; American Geological Institute, Alexandria,
Virginia, 788 pp.
Driscoll, Fletcher, G. 1986. Ground water and wells; Johnson
Division, St. Paul, Minnesota, 1089 pp.
Ingersoll-Rand, 1985. Drilling terminology; Ingersoll-Rand
Rotary Drill Division, Garland, Texas, 120 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1975. Manual
of water well construction practices; United States
Environmental Protection Agency, office of Water
Supply EPA-570/9-75-001,156 pp.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. RCRA
ground-water monitoring technical enforcement guidance
document; Office of Waste Programs Enforcement,
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,
Washington, D.C., OSWER-9950.1, 317 pp.
221
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PWNTINCOfTlCEJ 992 -7SO-002/S0072
-------
g r QA ynittd Stale
Environmental
f'rftli*-t:{ tun
home
Office of Water
^^^^^^^m*^ :«; y : :'• ' 'IT, • - ,:,>. : ','„
Water Qyality
United States Office of Water EPA 841-B-97-003
Environmental Protection 4503F November 1997
Agency
Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods
Manual
View full version of document
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of
the Adobe Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for
assisted technologies is also available.
Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Manual Organization
Chapter 2 Elements of a Stream Study
2.1 Basic Concepts
2.2 Designing the Stream Study
2.3 Safety Considerations
2.4 Basic Equipment
Chapter 3 Watershed Survey Methods
3.1 How to Conduct a Watershed Survey
3.2 The Visual Assessment
o Watershed Survey Visual Assessment (PDF, 15.4 KB)
Chapter 4 Macroinvertebrates and Habitat
4.1 Stream Habitat Walk
o Stream Habitat Walk (PDF, 139.0 KB)
-------
4.2 Streams!de Biosurvey
o Streamside Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrates (PDF, 32.7 KB)
o Streamside Biosurvey: Habitat Walk (PDF, 24.6 KB)
4.3 Intensive Stream Biosurvey
o Selecting Metrics to Determine Stream Health
o Intensive Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrate Assessment (PDF, 92.7
KB)
o Intensive Biosurvey: Habitat Assessment (PDF, 82.8 KB)
Chapter 5 Water Quality Conditions
o Quality Assurance, Quality Control, and Quality Assessment
Measures
5.1 Stream Flow
o Data Form for Calculating Flow (PDF, 9.7 KB)
5.2 Dissolved Oxygen and Biochemical Oxygen Demand
5.3 Temperature
5.4pH
5.5 Turbidity
5.6 Phosphorus
5.7 Nitrates
5.8 Total Solids
5.9 Conductivity
5.10 Total Alkalinity
5.11 Fecal Bacteria
o Water Quality Sampling Field Data Sheet (PDF, 6.2 KB)
Chapter 6 Managing and Presenting Monitoring Data
6.1 Managing Volunteer Data
6.2 Presenting the Data
6.3 Producing Reports
Appendices
A. Glossary
-------
B. Scientific Supply Houses
C. Determining Latitude and Longitude
o Worksheet for Calculating Latitude and Longitude (PDF, 23.5
KB)
Acknowledgments
This draft manual was developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through
contract no. 68C30303 with Tetra Tech, Inc. and through cooperative agreement no.
CT901837010 with the River Watch Network. The project manager was Alice Mayio,
USEPA Offi ce of Wetlands Oceans and Watersheds. Principal authors include Eric
Dohner, Abby Markowitz, Michael Barbour, and Jonathan Simpson of Tetra Tech, Inc.;
Jack Byrne and Geoff Dates of River Watch Network; and Alice Mayio of USEPA.
Illustrations are by Emily Faalasli, Tetra Tech, Inc. In addition, a workgroup of volunteer
monitoring program coordinators contributed significantly to this product. The authors
wish to thank, in particular; Carl Weber of the University of Maryland and Save Our
Streams; Jay West and Karen Firehock of the Izaak Walton League of America; Anne
Lyon of the Tennessee Valley Authority; and the many reviewers who provided
constructive and insightful comments to early drafts of this document. This manual
would not have been possible with out their invaluable advice and assistance.
NOTICE:
This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency policy and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial
products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Unllid
Environmental Proteeli&n
Office of Water '"'"
Quality
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1- Manual Organization
As part of its commitment to volunteer monitoring, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has worked since 1990 to develop a series of guidance manuals for
volunteer programs. Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual, the third in the
series, is designed as a companion document to Volunteer Water Monitoring: A Guide
for State Managers. The guide describes the role of volunteer monitoring in state
programs and discusses how managers can best organize, implement, and maintain
volunteer programs. This document builds on the concepts discussed in the Guide for
State Managers and applies them directly to streams and rivers.
Streams and rivers are monitored by more volunteer programs than any other waterbody
type. According to the fourth edition of the National Directory of Volunteer
Environmental Monitoring Programs (January 1994), three-quarters of the more than 500
programs listed conduct some sort of stream assessment as part, or all, of their monitoring
project.
As the interest in monitoring streams grows, so too does the desire of groups to apply an
integrated approach to the design and implementation of programs. More and more,
volunteer monitors are interested in taking a combination of physical, chemical, and
biological measurements and are beginning to understand how land uses in a watershed
influence the health of its waterways. This document includes sections on conducting
in-stream physical, chemical, and biological assessments as well as landuse or watershed
assessments.
The chemical and physical measurements described in this document can be applied to
rivers or streams of any size. However, the biological components (macroinvertebrates
and habitat) should be applied only to "wadable" streams (i.e., where streams are small in
width and relatively shallow in depth, and where both banks are clearly visible).
The purpose of this manual is not to mandate new methods or override methods currently
being used by volunteer monitoring groups. Instead, it is intended to serve as a tool for
-------
program managers who want to launch a new stream monitoring program or enhance an
existing program. Volunteer Stream Monitoring presents methods that have been adapted
from those used successfully by existing volunteer programs.
Further, it would be impossible to provide monitoring methods that are uniformly
applicable to all stream watersheds or all volunteer programs throughout the Nation.
Factors such as geographic region, program goals and objectives, and program resources
will all influence the specific methods used by each group. This manual therefore urges
volunteer program coordinators to work handinhand with state and local water quality
professionals or other potential data users in developing and implementing a volunteer
monitoring program. Through this partnership, volunteer programs gain improved
credibility and access to professional expertise and data; agencies gain credible data that
can be used in water quality planning. Bridges between citizens and water resource
managers are also the foundation for an active, educated, articulate, and effective
constituency of environmental stewards. This foundation is an essential component in the
management and preservation of our water resources.
EPA has developed two other methods manuals in this series. Volunteer Lake
Monitoring: A Methods Manual was published in December 1991. Volunteer Estuary
Monitoring: A Methods Manual was published in December 1993. To obtain any or all of
these documents, contact:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds
Volunteer Monitoring (4503F)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
1.1
Manual Organization
Volunteer Stream Monitoring: A Methods Manual is organized into six chapters. All
chapters include references for further reading.
Chapter One: Introduction
The first chapter introduces the manual and outlines its organization.
Chapter Two: Elements of a Stream Study
Chapter 2 introduces the concept of the stream environment and presents information on
the leading sources of pollution affecting streams in the United States. It then discusses in
some detail 10 questions volunteer program coordinators must answer in designing a
stream study, from knowing why monitoring is taking place to determining how the
program will ensure the data collected are credible. The chapter includes a highlight on
training volunteer monitors. The chapter concludes with safety and equipment
considerations.
Chapter Three: Watershed Survey Methods
This chapter describes how to conduct a watershed survey (also known as a watershed
inventory or visual survey), which can serve as a useful first step in developing a stream
monitoring program. It provides hints on conducting a background investigation of a
watershed and outlines steps for visually assessing the stream and its surrounding land
uses.
Chapter Four: Macroinvertebrates and Habitat
In this chapter, three increasingly complex methods of monitoring the biology of streams
are presented. The first is a simple stream survey that requires little training or
preparation; the second is a widely used macroinvertebrate sampling and stream survey
approach that yields a basic stream rating while monitors are still at the stream; and the
third is a macroinvertebrate sampling and advanced habitat assessment approach that
-------
requires professional and laboratory support but can yield data on comparatively subtle
stream impacts.
Chapter Five: Water Quality and Physical Conditions
Chapter 5 summarizes techniques for monitoring 10 different constituents of water:
dissolved oxygen/biochemical oxygen demand, temperature, pH, turbidity, phosphorus,
nitrates, total solids, conductivity, total alkalinity, and fecal bacteria. The chapter begins
with a discussion on preparing sampling containers, highlights basic steps for collecting
samples, and discusses taking stream flow measurements. This chapter discusses why
each parameter is important, outlines sampling and equipment considerations, and
provides instructions on sampling techniques.
Chapter Six: Managing and Presenting Monitoring Data
Chapter 6 outlines basic principles of data management, with an emphasis on proper
quality assurance/quality control procedures. Spreadsheets, databases, and mapping
software are discussed, as are basic approaches to presenting volunteer data to different
audiences. These approaches include simple graphs, summary statistics, and maps.
Lastly, the chapter briefly discusses ideas for distributing monitoring results to the public.
Appendices
• Appendix A provides a glossary of terms used in this manual.
• Appendix B lists a number of scientific supply houses where monitoring and
analytical equipment can be purchased.
• Appendix C discusses how to determine the latitude and longitude of monitoring
locations.
References and Further Reading
Ely, E. 1994. A Profile of Volunteer Monitoring. Volunteer Monitor. 6(1):4.
Ely, E. 1994. The Wide World of Monitoring: Beyond Water Quality Testing. Volunteer
Monitor. 6(1):8.
Lee, V. 1994. Volunteer Monitoring: A Brief History. Volunteer Monitor. 6(1): 14.
USEPA. 1996. The Volunteer Monitor's Guide To Quality Assurance Project Plans. EPA
841-B-96-003. September. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F,
Washington, DC 20460.
USEPA. 1994. National Directory of Volunteer Environmental Monitoring Programs,
fourth edition. EPA 841-B-94-001. January. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and
Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC 20460.
-------
USEPA. 1993. Volunteer Estuary Monitoring: A Methods Manual, EPA 842B93004,
December. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC 20460.
USEPA. 1991. Volunteer Lake Monitoring: A Methods Manual, EPA 440/491002,
December. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC 20460.
USEPA. 1990. Volunteer Water Monitoring: A Guide for State Managers, EPA
440/490010, August. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F, Washington,
DC 20460.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
"!§! CDjflk United Stales
\^LI /'VEnvironmental
Office of Water
^^^^^^^KBK «»::;•: - ,„•,:„,,, •;',',,' <,
Chapter 2
Elements of a Stream Study
2.1 - Basic Concepts
2.2 - Designing the Stream Study
2.3 - Safety Considerations
2.4 - Basic Equipment
This chapter is divided into three sections. The first section provides a review of basic
concepts concerning watersheds, the water cycle, stream habitat, and water quality. This
background information is essential for designing a stream monitoring program that
provides useful data.
Section 2.2 presents the 10 critical questions that should be answered by program
planners. These include: Why is monitoring taking place? Who will use the monitoring
data? and What parameters or conditions will be monitored? The last section discusses
the importance of safety in the field and laboratory.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
&ERA
Office of Water
United SI ales
Environmental Protection Agency
IM. / N'^n
ho me
Monitoring Water Quality
2.1
Basic Concepts
Watersheds
A watershed is the area of land from which runoff (from rain, snow, and springs) drains to a stream, river, lake, or
other body of water (Fig. 2.1). Its boundaries can be identified by locating the highest points of lands around the
waterbody. Streams and rivers function as the "arteries" of the watershed. They drain water from the land as they
flow from higher to lower elevations.
A watershed can be as small or as large as you care to define it. This is because several watersheds of small
streams usually exist within the watershed of a larger river. The watershed of the Mississippi River, for example,
is about 1.2 million square miles and contains thousands of smaller watersheds, each defined by a tributary stream
-------
that eventually drains into a larger river like the Ohio River or Missouri River and to the Mississippi itself.
The River System
Si.re.jm Order-s,
As streams flow downhill and meet other
streams in the watershed, a branching network
is formed (Fig. 2.2). When observed from the
air this network resembles a tree. The trunk of
the tree is represented by the largest river that
flows into the ocean or large lake. The
"tipmost" branches are the headwater streams.
This network of flowing water from the
headwater streams to the mouth of the largest
river is called the river system.
Water resource professionals have developed a
simple method of categorizing the streams in
the river system. Streams that have no
tributaries flowing into them are called
first-order streams. Streams that receive only
first-order streams are called second-order
streams. When two second-order streams meet,
the combined flow becomes a third-order
stream, and so on.
The Water Cycle
The water cycle is the movement of water
through the environment (Fig. 2.3). It is
through this movement that water in the river
system is replenished. When precipitation falls
to earth in a natural (undeveloped) watershed
1 ; . , , • in the midAtlantic states, for example, about
40 percent will be returned to the atmosphere
by evaporation or transpiration (loss of water vapor by plants). About 50 percent will percolate stream channel,
the ground water is discharged into the stream as a spring. The combination of ground water discharges to a
stream is defined as its baseflow. At times when there is no surface runoff, the entire flow of a stream might
actually be baseflow from ground water (Fig. 2.5).
Some streams, on the other hand,
constantly lose water to the ground
water. This occurs when the water
table is below the bottom of the
stream channel. Stream water
percolates down through the soil until
it reaches the zone of saturation.
Other streams alternate between
losing and gaining water as the water
table moves up and down according
to the seasonal conditions or pumpage
by area wells.
The interactions between the , .
watershed, soils, and water cycle
define the natural water flow (hydrology) of any particular stream. Most significant is the fact that developed land
is more impervious than natural land. Instead of percolating into the ground, rain hits the hard surfaces of
buildings, pavement, and compacted ground and runs off into a storm drain or other artificial structure designed
-------
to move water quickly away from developed areas and into a natural watercourse.
DTI]
J1TB
These conditions typically change the fate of precipitation in the water cycle (See Fig. 2 A, right panel). For
example:
• Less precipitation is evaporated back to the atmosphere. (Water is transported rapidly away via storm
drains and is not allowed to stand in pools.)
• Less precipitation is transpired back to the atmosphere from plants. (Natural vegetation is replaced by
buildings, pavement, etc.)
• Less precipitation percolates through the soil to become ground water. (This can result in a lower water
table and can affect baseflow.)
• More surface runoff is generated and transported to streams. (Streamflow becomes more intense during and
immediately after storms.)
Chapter 3, Watershed Survey Methods, is designed to help volunteers learn about their watershed. Using the
watershed survey approach, they will become familiar with their watershed's boundaries, its hydrologic features,
and the human uses of land and water that might be affecting the quality of the streams within it.
The Living Stream Environment
A healthy stream is a busy place. Wildlife and birds find shelter and food near and in its waters. Vegetation grows
along its banks, shading the stream, slowing its flow in rainstorms, filtering pollutants before they enter the
stream, and sheltering animals. Within the stream itself are fish and a myriad of insects and other tiny creatures
with very particular needs. For example, stream dwellers need dissolved oxygen to breathe; rocks, overhanging
tree limbs, logs, and roots for shelter; vegetation and other tiny animals to eat; and special places to breed and
-------
hatch their young. For many of these activities, they
might also need water of specific velocity, depth, and
temperature.
Human activities shape and alter many of these stream
characteristics. We dam up, straighten, divert, dredge,
dewater, and discharge to streams. We build roads,
parking lots, homes, offices, golf courses, and factories
in the watershed. We farm, mine, cut down trees, and
graze our livestock in and along stream edges. We also
swim, fish, and canoe in the streams themselves.
These activities can dramatically affect the many
components of the living stream environment (Fig. 2.6).
These components include:
ADJACENT
WATERSHED
Losing Stream
Gaining Stream
1. The adjacent watershed includes the higher ground that captures runoff and drains to the stream. For
purposes of this manual, the adjacent watershed is defined as land extending from the riparian zone to 1/4
mile from the stream.
2. TheJJoodplain is the low area of land that surrounds a stream and holds the overflow of water during a
flood.
3. The riparian zone is the area of natural vegetation extending outward from the edge of the stream bank.
The riparian zone is a buffer to pollutants entering a stream from runoff, controls erosion, and provides
stream habitat and nutrient input into the stream. A healthy stream system generally has a healthy riparian
zone. Reductions and impairment of riparian zones occur when roads, parking lots, fields, lawns, and other
artificially cultivated areas, bare soil, rocks, or buildings are near the stream bank.
4. The stream bank includes both an upper bank and a lower bank. The lower bank normally begins at the
normal water line and runs to the bottom of the stream. The upper bank extends from the break in the
normal slope of the surrounding land to the normal high water line.
5. The streamside cover includes any overhanging vegetation that offers protection and shading for the stream
and its aquatic inhabitants.
6. Stream vegetation includes emergent, submergent, and floating plants. Emergent plants include plants with
-------
true stems, roots, and leaves with most of their vegetative parts above the water. Submergent plants also
include some of the same types of plants, but they are completely immersed in water. Floating plants (e.g.,
duckweed, algae mats) are detached from any substrate and are therefore drifting in the water.
7. The channel of the streambed is the zone of the stream cross section that is usually submerged and totally
aquatic.
8. Pools are distinct habitats within the stream where the velocity of the water is reduced and the depth of the
water is greater than that of most other stream areas. A pool usually an has soft bottom sediments.
9. Riffles are shallow, turbulent, but swiftly flowing stretches of water that flow over partially or totally
submerged rocks.
10. Runs or glides are sections of the stream with a relatively low velocity that flow gently and smoothly with
little or no turbulence at the surface of the water.
11. The substrate is the material that makes up the streambed, such as clay, cobbles, or boulders.
Whether streams are active, fast moving, shady, cold, and clear or deep, slowmoving, muddy, and warm—or
something in between—they are shaped by the land they flow through and by what we do to that land. For
example, vegetation in the stream's riparian zone protects and serves as a buffer for the stream's streamside cover,
which in turn shades and enriches (by dropping leaves and other organic material) the water in the stream
channel.
Furthermore, the riparian zone helps maintain the stability of the stream bank by binding soils through root
systems and helps control erosion and prevent excessive siltation of the stream's substrate. If human activities
begin to degrade the stream's riparian zone, each of these stream components—and the aquatic insects, fish, and
plants that inhabit them—also begins to degrade. Chapter 4 includes methods that volunteers can use to assess the
stream's living environment—specifically, the insects that live in the stream and the physical components of the
stream (the habitats) that support them.
Water Quality
The water in a stream is always moving and mixing, both from top to bottom and from one side of the stream to
the other. Pollutants that enter the stream travel some distance before they are thoroughly mixed throughout the
flow. For example, water upstream of a pipe discharging wastewater might be clean. At the discharge site and
immediately downstream, the water might be extremely degraded. Further downstream, in the recovery zone,
overall quality might improve as pollutants are diluted with more water. Far downstream the stream as a whole
might be relatively clean again. Unfortunately, most streams with one source of pollution often are affected by
many others as well.
Pollution is broadly divided into two classes according to its source. Point source pollution comes from a clearly
identifiable point such as a pipe which discharges directly into a waterbody. Examples of point sources include
factories, wastewater treatment plants, and illegal straight pipes from homes and boats.
Nonpoint source pollution comes from surface water runoff. It originates from a broad area and thus can be
difficult to identify. Examples of nonpoint sources include agricultural runoff, mine drainage, construction site
runoff, and runoff from city streets and parking lots.
Nationally, the pollutants most often found in the stream environment are not toxic substances like lead, mercury,
or oil and grease. More impacts are caused by sediments and silt from eroded land and nutrients such as the
nitrogen and phosphorus found in fertilizers, detergents, and sewage treatment plant discharges. Other leading
pollutants include pathogens such as bacteria, pesticides, and organic enrichment that leads to low levels of
dissolved oxygen. Common sources of pollution to streams include:
• Agricultural activities such as crop production, cattle grazing, and maintaining livestock in holding areas or
feedlots. These contribute pollutants such as sediments, nutrients, pesticides, herbicides, pathogens, and
organic enrichment.
• Municipal dischargers such as sewage treatment plants which contribute nutrients, pathogens, organic
enrichment, and toxicants.
• Urban runoff from city streets, parking lots, sidewalks, storm sewers, lawns, golf courses, and building
-------
sites. Common pollutants include sediments, nutrients, oxygendemanding substances, road salts, heavy
metals, petroleum products, and pathogens.
Other commonly reported sources of pollutants are mining, industrial dischargers (factories), forestry activities,
and modifications to stream habitat and hydrology.
Chapter 5 describes methods volunteers can use to monitor water quality and detect pollutants from these sources.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
£S CDA United Stales
\^LI /\ Protection
Office of
'^^^^^^^^^^MMBIffii'^BIMitti''^^*&*-' >' ;,>; ^ {>!>>
Monitoring Water Quality
2.2
Designing the Stream Study
Training Volunteer Monitors
Before beginning a stream monitoring study, volunteer program officials should develop a
design or plan that answers the 10 basic questions listed below. Without answers to these
questions, the monitoring program might well end up collecting data that do not meet
anyone's needs.
Answering these 10 questions is not easy. A planning committee composed of the program
coordinator, key volunteers, scientific advisors, program supporters, and data users should
resolve these questions well before the project gets under way. Naturally, the committee
should also address other planning questions less directly related to monitoring design,
such as how to recruit volunteers and how to secure funding for the project. Answers will
likely change as the program matures. For example, program coordinators might find that a
method is not producing data of high enough quality, data collection is too labor-intensive
or expensive, or additional parameters need to be monitored.
1. Why is the monitoring taking place?
Typical reasons for initiating a volunteer monitoring project include:
• Developing baseline characterization data
• Documenting water quality changes over time
• Screening for potential water quality problems
• Determining whether waters are safe for swimming
• Providing a scientific basis for making decisions on the management of a stream or
watershed
• Determining the impact of a municipal sewage treatment facility, industrial facility,
or land use activity such as forestry or farming
• Educating the local community or stream users to encourage pollution prevention
and environmental stewardship
• Showing public officials that local citizens care about the condition and management
of their water resources
-------
Of course, an individual program might be monitoring for a number of reasons. However,
it is important to identify one or two top reasons and develop the program based on those
objectives.
2. Who will use the monitoring data?
Knowing your data users is essential to the program development process. Potential data
users might include:
• State, county, or local water quality analysts
• The volunteers themselves
• Fisheries biologists
• Universities
• Schoolteachers
• Environmental organizations
• Parks and recreation staff
• Local planning and zoning agencies
• State environmental agencies
• State and local health departments
• Soil and water conservation districts
• Federal agencies such as the U.S. Geological Survey or U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Each of these users will have different data requirements. Some users, such as government
analysts and planning/zoning agencies, will have more stringent requirements than others
and will require higher levels of quality assurance. As the volunteer monitoring project is
being designed, program coordinators should contact as many potential information users
as possible to determine their data needs. It is important to have at least one user
committed to receiving and using the data. In some cases that user might be the monitoring
group itself.
3. How will the data be used?
The range of uses of volunteer data is limited only by the imagination. Volunteer data
could be used, for example, to influence local planning decisions about where to site a
sewage treatment facility or to publicize a water quality problem and seek community
solutions. Collected data could also be used to educate primary school children about the
importance of water resources. Other data uses include the support of:
• Local zoning requirements
• A stream protection study
• State preparation of water quality assessments
• Screening waters for potential problems
• The setting of statewide priorities for pollution control
-------
Each data use potentially has different data requirements. Knowing the ultimate uses of the
collected volunteer data will help determine the right kind of data to collect and the level of
effort required to collect, analyze, store, and report them.
Type Approach
Applications*
Physical
Condition
Biological
condition
Chemical
condition
Watershed
survey
Habitat
assessment
Macroinvertebrate
sampling
Water quality
sampling
Determine land use patterns; determine
presence of current and historical pollution
sources; identify gross pollution problems;
identify water uses, users, diversions, and
stream obstructions
Determine and isolate impacts of pollution
sources, particularly land use activities;
interpret biological data; screen for
impairments
Screen for impairment; identify impacts of
pollution and pollution control activities;
determine the severity of the pollution
problem and rank stream sites; identify
water quality trends; determine support of
designated aquatic life uses.
Screen for impairment; identify specific
pollutants of concern; identify water quality
trends; determine support of designated
contact recreation uses; identify potential
pollution sources
* Beyond education and promoting stewardship
4. What parameters or conditions will be monitored?
Determining what to monitor will depend on the needs of the data users, the intended use
of the data, and the resources of the volunteer program. If the program's goal is to
determine whether a creek is suitable for swimming, for example, a human-healthrelated
parameter such as fecal coliform bacteria should be monitored. If the objective is to
characterize the ability of a stream to support sport fish, volunteers should examine stream
habitat characteristics, the aquatic insect community, and water quality parameters such as
dissolved oxygen and temperature. Alternatively, if a program seeks to provide baseline
data useful to state water quality or natural resource agencies, program designers should
consult those agencies to determine which parameters they consider of greatest value.
Money for test kits or meters, available laboratory facilities, help from state or university
advisors, and the abilities and desires of volunteers will also clearly have an impact on the
choice of parameters to be monitored. For characterization studies, EPA usually
recommends an approach that integrates physical, chemical, and biological parameters.
-------
5. How good does the monitoring data need to be?
Some uses require high-quality data. For example, high-quality data are usually needed to
prove compliance with environmental regulations, assess pollution impacts, or make land
use planning decisions. In other cases the quality of the data is secondary to the actual
process of collecting it. This is often the case for monitoring programs that focus on the
overall educational aspects of stream monitoring.
Data quality is measured in five ways accuracy, precision, completeness,
representativeness, and comparability (see box Data Quality Terms).
Data Quality Terms
• Accuracy is the
degree of agreement
between the sampling
result and the true
value of the
parameter or
condition being
measured. Accuracy
is most affected by
the equipment and the
procedure used to
measure the paramter.
• Precision, on the
other hand, refers to
how well you are able
to reproduce the
result on the same
sample, regardless of
accuracy. Human
error in sampling
techniques plays an
important role in
estimating precision.
• Representativeness
is the degree to which
collected data
actually represent the
stream condition
being monitored. It is
most affected by site
location.
• Completeness is a
» and inaccurate
-------
measure of the
amount of valid data
actually obtained vs.
the amount expected
to be obtained as a
specified in the
original sampling
design. It is usually
expressed as a
percentage. For
example, if 100
samples were
scheduled but
volunteers sampled
only 90 times due to
bad weather or
broken equipment,
the completeness
record would be 90
percent.
• Comparability
represents how well
data from one stream
or stream site can be
compared to data
from another. Most
managers will
compare sites as part
of a statewide or
regional report on the
volunteer monitoring
program; therefore,
sampling methods
should be the same
from site to site.
but
•mt
Af feiif fsiprtcwt
Thai
6. What methods should be used?
The methods adopted by a volunteer program depend primarily on how the data will be
used and what kind of data quality is needed. There are, of course, many sampling
considerations including:
• How samples will be collected (e.g., using grab samples or measuring directly with a
meter)
• What sampling equipment will be used (e.g., disposable Whirlpak bags, glass
-------
bottles, 500-micron mesh size kick net, etc.)
• What equipment preparation methods are necessary (such as container sterilization
or meter calibration)
• What protocols will be followed (such as the Winkler method for dissolved oxygen,
intensive stream bioassessment approach for habitat and benthic macroinvertebrates,
etc.)
Analytical questions must also be addressed such as:
• Will volunteers return to a lab for macroinvertebrate identification or dissolved
oxygen titration procedures or conduct them in the field?
• Will a color wheel provide nitrate data of needed quality, or is a more sophisticated
approach needed?
• Should visual observation and habitat assessment approaches be combined with
turbidity measures to best determine the impact of construction sites? While
sophisticated methods usually yield more accurate and precise data (if properly
carried out), they are also more costly and timeconsuming. This extra effort and
expense might be worthwhile if the goal of the program is to produce high-quality
data. Programs with an educational focus, however, can often use less sensitive
equipment and less sophisticated methods to meet their goals.
7. Where are the monitoring sites?
Sites might be chosen for any number of reasons such as accessibility, proximity to
volunteers' homes, value to potential users such as state agencies, or location in problem
areas. If the volunteer program is providing baseline data to characterize a stream or screen
for problems, it might wish to monitor a number of sites representing a range of conditions
in the stream watershed (e.g., an upstream "pristine" area, above and below towns and
cities, in agricultural areas and parks, etc.). For more specific purposes, such as
determining whether a stream is safe to swim in, it might only be necessary to sample
selected swimming areas. To determine whether a particular land use activity or potential
source of pollution is, in fact, having an impact, it might be best to monitor upstream and
downstream of the area where the source is suspected. To determine the effectiveness of
runoff control measures, a paired watershed approach might be best (e.g., sampling two
similar small watersheds, one with controls in place and one without controls).
A program manager might also select one or more sites near professionally monitored sites
in order to compare the quality of volunteer-generated data against professional data. It
might also be helpful to locate some sites near U.S. Geological Survey gauging stations,
which can provide useful data on streamflow. Certainly, for any volunteer program, safety
and accessibility (both legal and physical) will be important in determining site location.
No matter how sampling sites are chosen, most monitoring programs will need to maintain
the same sites over time and identify them clearly in their monitoring program design.
When selecting monitoring sites, ask the following questions. Based on the answers, you
may need to eliminate some sites or select alternative locations that meet your criteria:
-------
• Are other groups (local, state, federal agencies; other volunteer groups; schools or
colleges) already monitoring this site?
• Can you identify the site on a map and on the ground?
• Is the site representative of the watershed?
• Does the site have water in it during the times of year that monitoring will take
place?
• Is there safe, convenient access to the site (including adequate parking) and a way to
safely sample a flowing section of the stream? Is there access all year long?
• Can you acquire landowner permission?
• Can you perform all the monitoring activities and tests that are planned at this site?
• Is the site far enough downstream of drains or tributaries? Is the site near tributary
inflows, dams, bridges, or other structures that may affect the results?
• Have you selected enough sites for the study you want to do?
Once you have selected the monitoring sites, you should be able to identify them by
latitude and longitude. This location information is critical if your data will potentially be
used in Geographical Information Systems (GIS) or in sophisticated data management
systems (See Appendix C).
8. When will monitoring occur?
A program should specify:
• What time of day is best for sampling. (Temperature and dissolved oxygen, for
example, can fluctuate naturally as the sun rises and aquatic plants release oxygen.)
• What time of year is best for sampling. (For example, there is no point in sampling
fecal coliform bacteria at swimming beaches in the winter, when no one is
swimming, or sampling intermittent streams at the height of summer, when because
of dry conditions the streams hold little water.)
• How frequently should monitoring take place? (It is possible, for example, to
conduct too many biological assessments of a stream and thereby deplete the
stream's aquatic community. A program designed to determine whether polluted
runoff is a problem would do well to monitor after storms and heavy rainfalls.)
In general, monthly chemical sampling and twiceyearly biological sampling are considered
adequate to identify water quality changes over time. Biological sampling should be
conducted at the same time each year because natural variations in aquatic insect
population and streamside vegetation occur as seasons change. Monitoring at the same
time of day and at regular intervals (e.g., at 2:00 p.m. every 30 days) helps ensure
comparability of data over time.
-------
9. How will monitoring data be managed and presented?
The volunteer program coordinator should have a clear plan for dealing with the data
collected each year. Field and lab data sheets should be checked for completeness, data
should be screened for outliers, and a database should be developed or adapted to store and
manipulate the data. The elements of such a database should be clearly explained in order
to allow users to interpret the data accurately and with confidence.
Program coordinators will also have to decide how they want to present data results, not
only to the general public and to specific data users, but also to the volunteers themselves.
Different levels of analysis might be needed for different audiences. A volunteer group
collecting data for state or county use should consult with the appropriate agency before
investing in computerized data management software because the agency could have
specific needs or recommendations based on its own data management protocols.
10. How will the program ensure that data are credible?
Developing specific answers to questions 19 is the first step in ensuring that data are
credible. Credible data meet specific needs and can be used with confidence for those
needs. Other steps include:
• Properly training, testing, and retraining volunteers
• Evaluating the program's success after an initial pilot stage and making any
necessary adjustments
• Assigning specific quality assurance tasks to qualified individuals in the program
• Documenting in a written plan all the steps taken to sample, analyze, store, manage,
and present data
A written plan, known as a quality assurance project plan, can be elaborate or simple
depending on the volunteer program's goals. Its essential feature, however, is that it
documents how the data are to be generated. Without such knowledge, the data cannot be
used with confidence. It is also important for educating future volunteers and data users
about the program and the data. People might be analyzing the data 5 or 10 or more years
later to study trends in stream quality. (Note: EPA requires that any monitoring program
sponsored by EPA through grants, contracts, or other formal agreement must carry out a
quality assurance/quality control program and develop a quality assurance project plan.)
-------
Put It in Writing
When you and the volunteer program planning committee have answered the
ten project design questions to everyone's satisfaction, your next critical step
is to put it all in writing. The written plan, including sampling and analytical
methods, sites, parameters, project goals, and data quality considerations, is
your bible. With a written plan you:
• Document the particulars of your program for your data users
• Educate newcomers to the program
• Ensure that newcomers will use the same methods as those who came
before them
• Keep an historical record for future program leaders, volunteers, and
data users
Your written plan may simply consist of a study design and standard
• operating procedures such as a monitoring and lab methods manual. You
may, however, prefer to develop a more comprehensive quality assurance
project plan. The quality assurance project plan is a document that outlines
the procedures you will use to ensure high quality data when conducting
sample collection and analysis in your program.
By law, any water quality monitoring program that receives EPA funding is
required to have an EPA-approved quality assurance project plan. Even if
you don't receive EPA funding, you will find that preparing a written plan
helps ensure that your data are used with confidence, now and in the future.
(See The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Project Plans
(EPA 841-B-96-003 September 1996) for more information.)
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home I Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
of
United Slates
Environmental
t'rnlt*-t:{ inn
home
Training Volunteer Monitors
Back to Section 2.2 - Designing the Stream Study
Training should be an essential component of any volunteer stream monitoring project.
When volunteers are properly trained in the goals of the volunteer project and its
sampling and analytical methods, they:
• Produce higher quality, more credible data.
• Better understand their role in protecting water quality.
• Are more motivated to continue monitoring.
• Save program manager time and effort by becoming better monitors who require
less supervision.
• Feel more like part of a dedicated team.
Some of the key elements to consider in developing a training program for volunteers
include the following:
1. Plan ahead. When you are in the early stages of developing your training program,
decide who will do the training, when training will occur, where it will be held,
what equipment and handouts volunteers will receive, and what, in they end, they
will learn. Plan on at least one initial training session at the start of the sampling
season and a quality control session somewhat into the season (to see if volunteers
are using the right methods, and to answer questions). If volunteers will be
sampling many different chemical parameters or will be conducting intensive
biological monitoring, you should probably schedule two initial training
sessions—one to introduce volunteers to the program, and the other to cover
sampling and analytical methods in detail. You might also want to plan a
postseason session that encourages volunteers to air problems, exchange
information, and make suggestions for the coming year. Make sure the program
planning committee agrees to the training plan.
2. Put it in writing. Once you've made these decisions, write them all down. Note the
training specifics in the program's quality assurance project plan. It might also help
to develop a "job description" for the volunteers that lists the tasks they will
perform in the field and lab, and that identifies the obligations to which they will
be held and the schedule they will follow. Hand this out at the first training session.
Volunteers should leave the session knowing what is expected of them. If they
decide not to join after all because the tasks are too onerous, it is better for you to
-------
find out after the first session than later in the sampling year.
3. Be prepared. Nothing will discourage volunteers more than an illplanned, chaotic
initial training session. The elements of a successful initial training session include:
o Enthusiastic, knowledgeable trainers
o Short presentations that encourage audience participation and don't strain
attention spans
o A low ratio of trainers to trainees
o Presentations that include why the monitoring is needed, what the program
hopes to accomplish, and what will be done with the data
o An agenda that is followed (especially start and finish times)
o Good acoustics, clear voices, and interesting audiovisual aids
o Opportunities for all trainees to handle equipment, view demonstrations of
sampling protocols, and practice sampling
o Instruction on safety considerations
o Refreshments and opportunities for trainees to meet one another, socialize,
and have fun
o Time for questions and answers.
4. Conduct quality control checks. After your initial training session(s), schedule
opportunities to "check up" on how your volunteers are performing. The purpose
of these quality control checks is to ensure that all volunteers are monitoring using
proper and consistent protocols, and to emphasize the importance of quality control
measures. Some time into the sampling season, observe how volunteers are
sampling, analyzing their samples, identifying macroinvertebrates, and recording
their results. Either observe volunteers in small groups at their monitoring sites or
bring them to a central location for an organized quality control session. If your
program is involved in chemical monitoring, you might want all volunteers to
analyze the same water sample using their own equipment, or hold a lab exercise in
which volunteers read and record results from equipment and kits that have already
been set up. For a biological monitoring program, have trainers or seasoned
volunteers observe sampling methods in the field and provide preserved samples of
macroinvertebrates for volunteers to identify. Reserve time to answer questions,
talk about initial findings, and have some fun.
5. Review the effectiveness of your training program. At the end of each training
session, encourage volunteers to fill out a training evaluation form. This form
should help you assess the effectiveness of individual trainers and their styles, the
handouts and audiovisual aids, the general atmosphere of the training session, and
what the volunteers liked most and least about the session. Use the results of the
evaluation to revise training protocols as needed to best meet program and
volunteer needs.
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
2.3
Safety Considerations
One of the most critical considerations for a volunteer monitoring program is the safety
of its volunteers. All volunteers should be trained in safety procedures and should carry
with them a set of safety instructions and the phone number of their program coordinator
or team leader. Safety precautions can never be overemphasized.
The following are some basic common sense safety rules. At the site:
• Always monitor with at least one partner. Teams of three or four people are best.
Always let someone else know where you are, when you intend to return, and what
to do if you don't come back at the appointed time.
• Develop a safety plan. Find out the location and telephone number of the nearest
telephone and write it down. Locate the nearest medical center and write down
directions on how to get between the center and your site(s) so that you can direct
emergency personnel. Have each member of the sampling team complete a
medical form that includes emergency contacts, insurance information, and
pertinent health information such as allergies, diabetes, epilepsy, etc.
• Have a first aid kit handy (see box below). Know any important medical conditions
of team members (e.g., heart conditions or allergic reactions to bee stings). It is
best if at least one team member has first aid/CPR training.
• Listen to weather reports. Never go sampling if severe weather is predicted or if a
storm occurs while at the site.
• Never wade in swift or high water. Do not monitor if the stream is at flood stage.
• If you drive, park in a safe location. Be sure your car doesn't pose a hazard to other
drivers and that you don't block traffic.
• Put your wallet and keys in a safe place, such as a watertight bag you keep in a
pouch strapped to your waist. Without proper precautions, wallet and keys might
end up downstream.
• Never cross private property without the permission of the landowner. Better yet,
sample only at public access points such as bridge or road crossings or public
parks. Take along a card identifying you as a volunteer monitor.
• Confirm that you are at the proper site location by checking maps, site
-------
descriptions, or directions.
• Watch for irate dogs, farm animals, wildlife (particularly snakes), and insects such
as ticks, hornets, and wasps. Know what to do if you get bitten or stung.
• Watch for poison ivy, poison oak, sumac, and other types of vegetation in your
area that can cause rashes and irritation.
• Never drink the water in a stream. Assume it is unsafe to drink, and bring your
own water from home. After monitoring, wash your hands with antibacterial soap.
• Do not monitor if the stream is posted as unsafe for body contact. If the water
appears to be severely polluted, contact your program coordinator.
• Do not walk on unstable stream banks. Disturbing these banks can accelerate
erosion and might prove dangerous if a bank collapses. Disturb streamside
vegetation as little as possible.
• Be very careful when walking in the stream itself. Rocky-bottom streams can be
very slippery and can contain deep pools; muddy-bottom streams might also prove
treacherous in areas where mud, silt, or sand have accumulated in sink holes. If
you must cross the stream, use a walking stick to steady yourself and to probe for
deep water or muck. Your partner(s) should wait on dry land ready to assist you if
you fall. Do not attempt to cross streams that are swift and above the knee in depth.
Wear waders and rubber gloves in streams suspected of having significant
pollution problems.
• If you are sampling from a bridge, be wary of passing traffic. Never lean over
bridge rails unless you are firmly anchored to the ground or the bridge with good
hand/foot holds.
• If at any time you feel uncomfortable about the condition of the stream or
your surroundings, stop monitoring and leave the site at once. Your safety is
more important than the data!
When using chemicals:
• Know your equipment, sampling instructions, and procedures before going out into
the field. Prepare labels and clean equipment before you get started.
• Keep all equipment and chemicals away from small children. Many of the
chemicals used in monitoring are poisonous. Tape the phone number of the local
poison control center to your sampling kit.
• Avoid contact between chemical reagents and skin, eye, nose, and mouth. Never
use your fingers to stopper a sample bottle (e.g., when you are shaking a solution).
Wear safety goggles when performing any chemical test or handling preservatives.
• Know chemical cleanup and disposal procedures. Wipe up all spills when they
occur. Return all unused chemicals to your program coordinator for safe disposal.
Close all containers tightly after use. Do not switch caps.
• Know how to use and store chemicals. Do not expose chemicals or equipment to
temperature extremes or longterm direct sunshine.
-------
First Aid Kit
The minimum first aid kit should contain the following items:
o Telephone numbers of emergency personnel such as the police and an
ambulance service.
o Several band-aids for minor cuts.
o Antibacterial or alcohol wipes.
o First aid creme or ointment.
o Several gauze pads 3 or 4 inches square for deep wounds with
excessive bleeding.
o Acetaminophen for relieving pain and reducing fever.
o A needle for removing splinters.
o A first aid manual which outlines diagnosis and treatment procedures.
o A single-edged razor blade for minor surgery, cutting tape to size, and
shaving hairy spots before taping.
o A 2-inch roll of gauze bandage for large cuts.
o A triangular bandage for large wounds.
o A large compress bandage to hold dressings in place.
o A 3-inch wide elastic bandage for sprains and applying pressure to
bleeding wounds.
o If a participant is sensitive to bee stings, include their
doctor-prescribed antihistamine.
Be sure you have emergency telephone numbers and medical information
with you at the field site for everyone participating in field work (including
the leader) in case there is an emergency.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
Office of Water
Water
2.4
Basic Equipment
Much of the equipment a volunteer will need is easily obtained from either hardware
stores or scientific supply houses. Other equipment can be found around the house. In
either case, the volunteer program should clearly specify the equipment its volunteers
will need and where it should be obtained.
Listed below is some basic equipment appropriate for any volunteer field activity. Much
of this equipment is optional but will enhance the volunteers' safety and effectiveness.
• Boots or waders; life jackets if you are sampling by boat
• Walking stick of known length for balance, probing, and measuring
• Bright-colored snag- and thorn- resistant clothes; long sleeves and pants are best
• Rubber gloves to guard against contamination
• Insect repellent/sunscreen
• Small first aid kit, flashlight, and extra batteries
• Whistle to summon help in emergencies
• Refreshments and drinking water
• Clipboard, preferably with plastic cover
• Several pencils
• Tape measure
• Thermometer
• Field data sheet
• Information sheet with safety instructions, site location information, and numbers
to call in emergencies
• Camera and film, to document particular conditions
Specific equipment lists for the chemical and biological monitoring procedures included
in the manual are provided in the relevant chapters.
-------
References and Further Reading
Dates, G. 1994. A Plan for Watershedwide Volunteer Monitoring. The Volunteer
Monitor. 6(2):8.
Ely, E. 1992. Building Credibility. The Volunteer Monitor. 4(2).
Ely, E. 1994. What Parameters Volunteer Groups Test. The Volunteer Monitor. 6(1):6.
Picotte, A. 1994. Citizen's Data Used to Set Phosphorus Standards. The Volunteer
Monitor. 6(1): 18.
Weber, P. andF. Dowman. 1994. The Web of Water. The Volunteer Monitor. 6(2): 10.
USEPA. 1990. Volunteer Water Monitoring: A Guide for State Managers. EPA
440/490010. August. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water,
Washington, DC 20460.
USEPA. 1993. EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for
Environmental Data Operations. EPA QA/R5. July. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Quality Assurance Management Staff, Washington, DC 20460.
USEPA. 1993. Integrating Quality Assurance into Tribal Water Programs. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 999 18th St., Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202.
USEPA. 1996. The Volunteer Monitor's Guide To Quality Assurance Project Plans. EPA
841-B-96-003. September. Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F,
Washington, DC 20460.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
VS'LI /""V Environmental
Office of Water
^^^^^^^mmm^ f • ••',', ,>•«.> •,,
Water Quality
Chapter 3
Watershed Survey Methods
3.1- How to Conduct a Watershed Survey
3.2 - The Visual Assessment
One of the most rewarding and least costly stream monitoring activities a volunteer
program can conduct is the watershed survey. Some programs call it a windshield survey,
a visual survey, or a watershed inventory. It is, in essence, a comprehensive survey of the
geography, land and water uses, potential and actual pollution sources, and history of the
stream and its watershed.
The watershed survey may be divided into two distinct parts:
• A onetime background investigation of the stream and its watershed. (To do this,
volunteers research town and county records, maps, photos, news stories, industrial
discharge records, and oral histories.)
• A periodic visual assessment of the stream and its watershed. (To do this,
volunteers walk along the stream and drive through the watershed, noting key
features.)
The watershed survey requires little in the way of training or equipment. Its chief uses
include:
• Screening for pollution problems
• Identifying potential sources of pollution
• Identifying sites for monitoring
• Helping interpret biological and chemical information
• Giving volunteers and local residents a sense of the value of the stream or
watershed
• Educating volunteers and the local community about potential pollution sources
and the stressors affecting the stream and its watershed
• Providing a blueprint for possible community restoration efforts such as cleanups
and tree plantings
-------
To actually determine whether those stressors are, in fact, affecting the stream requires
additional monitoring of chemical, physical, or biological conditions.
The watershed survey described in this chapter was developed from survey approaches
used by programs such as Rhode Island Watershed Watch, Maryland Save Our Streams,
the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, and
Washington's AdoptA Stream Foundation. References are provided at the end of this
chapter for further information on watershed surveys.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
3.1
How to Conduct a Watershed Survey
The Background Investigation
Researching the stream is generally a onetime activity that should yield valuable
information about the cultural and natural history of the stream and the uses of the land
surrounding it. This information will prove helpful in orienting new volunteers to the
purpose of the monitoring program, in building a sense of the importance of the stream
and its role in the watershed, and in identifying land use activities in the watershed with a
potential to affect the quality of the stream. The program might choose to monitor these
areas and activities more intensively in the future.
The background investigation is essentially a "detective investigation" for information on
the stream and includes the following steps:
Task 1 Determine what you want to know about your
stream
Before beginning the background investigation, establish what it is you want to know
about the stream you are surveying. Types of information include:
• Location of the stream's headwaters, its length, where it flows, and where it
empties
• Name and boundaries of the watershed it occupies, the population in the
watershed, and the communities through which it flows
• Roles of various jurisdictions in managing the stream and watershed
• Percentage of watershed land area in each town or jurisdiction
• Land uses in the stream's watershed
• Industries and others that discharge to the stream
• Current uses of the stream (such as fishing, swimming, drinking water supply,
irrigation)
• Historical land uses
-------
• History of the stream
Any or all of these types of information should prove valuable to the monitoring
program. You might also uncover other important information in the process. At a
minimum, the investigation should yield information on the size of the stream, watershed
boundaries, and general land use in the area. By establishing categories of information to
investigate, program coordinators can assign volunteers to specific activities and end up
with a complete picture of the stream that answers many questions of value to the
program.
Task 2 Determine the tools you will need
Offered below are some of the tools you will need to find answers in your background
investigation of the stream.
Stream headwaters, length, tributaries, final stream destination, and watershed boundaries
are best determined through maps. Of greatest value are U.S. Geological Survey 7 1/2-
minute topographic maps (on a 1:24,000 scale where 1 inch = 2,000 feet). At varying
degrees of resolution, they depict landforms, major roads and political boundaries,
developments, streams, tributaries, lakes, and other land features. Sporting goods stores
and bookstores often carry these maps, especially for recreational areas that are likely to
be hiked or camped. The maps can also be ordered through the U.S. Geological Survey
(see Obtaining USGS Topographic Maps).
Road, state, and county maps might also prove helpful in identifying some of these
stream and watershed features. Hydrologic unit maps, also available from the U.S.
Geological Survey but at a 1:100,000 scale of resolution (less detail than the 7 1/2-minute
maps cited above), might also help you determine hydrologic watershed boundaries.
Atlases and other reference materials at libraries can prove helpful in determining facts
about population in the watershed.
Land uses in the stream watershed might also be depicted on maps such as those
discussed above. You will verify this information in the second half of the watershed
survey, when you are actually in the field observing land around the stream. Information
from maps is particularly useful in developing a broad statement about general land use
in the stream watershed (e.g., land use in the hypothetical Volunteer Creek watershed is
60 percent residential, 20 percent parkland/recreational, and 20 percent light industrial).
-------
Obtaining USGS Topographic Maps
The U.S. Geological Survey's Earth Science Information Centers can provide
you with a catalog of available USGS topographic maps, a brochure on how
to use topographic maps, and general information on ESIC services. Contact
the main ESIC office at:
USGS Earth Science Information Center
507 National Center
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, VA 22092
1-800-USA-MAPS
You can obtain a free USGS Indexing Catalog to help you identify the
map(s) you need by calling 1-800-435-7627. If you know the coordinates of
the map you need, you can order it directly from:
USGS
Branch of Information Services
Box 25286
Denver, CO 80225
Place your order in writing and include a check for $4.00 per map plus $3.50
for shipping and handling. The ESIC can also refer you to commercial map
distributors that can get you the topographic maps sooner, for a higher fee.
USGS topographic maps might also be available from sporting goods stores
in your area.
Other sources of information include:
• Land use plans from local planning offices, which include information not only for
current land uses but for potential uses for which the area is zoned
• Conservation district offices or offices of the agricultural extension service or
Natural Resources Conservation Service (Formerly the Soil Conservation Service,
these offices might be able to provide information on agricultural land in rural
areas)
• Local offices of the U.S. Geological Survey, which might provide a variety of
publications, special studies, maps, and photos on land uses and landforms in the
area
• Aerial photographs, which might provide current and historical views of land uses
Industries and others that discharge to the stream might be identified at the state, city, or
county environmental protection or water quality office. (The name of the agency will
vary by locality.) At these offices, you may ask to see records of industries with permits
to discharge treated effluent to streams. These records are maintained through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). All industrial and municipal
dischargers are required to have permits that specify where, when, and what they are
-------
allowed to discharge to waters of the United States.
Especially in older metropolitan areas, combined sewers are also potential discharges.
Combined sewers are pipes in which sanitary sewer waste overflow and storm water are
combined in times of heavy rain. These combined sewers are designed to discharge
directly into harbors and rivers during storms when the volume of flow in the sewers
exceeds the capacity of the sewer system. The discharge might include raw sanitary
sewage waste. Combined sewers do not flow in dry weather. Maps of sewer systems can
be obtained from your local water utility.
The state or local environmental agency should also be able to provide location
information on other potential pollution sources such as landfills, wastewater treatment
plants, and storm water detention ponds.
Current uses of the stream are established in state water quality standards, which specify
what the uses of all state waters should be. These uses can include, for example, cold
water fisheries, primary contact recreation (swimming) and irrigation. The state also
establishes criteria or limits on pollutants in the waters necessary to maintain sufficient
water quality to support those uses, as well as a narrative statement that prohibits
degradation of waters below their designated uses.
Section 305(b) of the Clean Water Act requires states to report to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency on the designated uses of their waters, the extent of the impairment of
those uses, and the causes and sources of impairment. This information is kept on file at
the state water quality agency. While state reports cannot specify water uses and degree
of impairment in all individual streams in the state, they are a good starting point. Write
to the state water quality agency for its biennial water quality (section 305(b))
assessment.
You might also be able to obtain a copy of your state's water quality standards or
establish contact with a water quality specialist who can give you information on
standards for your stream. Again, information on actual water uses will be verified and
detailed once you walk the stream during the visual assessment portion of your watershed
survey.
Historical land uses and the history of the stream might take some legwork to uncover.
Local historical societies, libraries, and newspaper archives are good places to start. Look
for historical photos of the area and stories about fishing contests, fish kills, spills, floods,
and other major events affecting the stream and its watershed. County or town planning
offices might be able to provide information on when residential developments were built
and when streams were channelized or diverted. State and local transportation agencies
might have records on when highways and bridges were built. State environmental
regulatory agencies have records of past or current applications to modify stream
hydrology through dredging, channelization, and stream bank stabilization.
Long-time residents are another invaluable source of information on the history of your
stream. People who fished or swam in your stream in their youth might have witnessed
-------
how the stream has changed. They might remember industries or land use activities of the
past such as mines or farms that could have affected the stream. They might have tales to
tell about fish they once caught or floods that led to channelization and dams.
Assembling such oral histories is a particularly good activity for schoolage volunteers.
-------
Getting to Know the Boundaries of Your Watershed
Once you've obtained topographic maps of your area, follow these steps to
draw your watershed boundaries:
1. Locate and mark the downstream outlet of the watershed. For rivers
and streams, this is the farthest downstream point in which you are
interested.
2. Locate all water features such as streams, wetlands, lakes, and
reservoirs that eventually flow to the outlet. Start with major
tributaries, then include smaller creeks and drainage channels. To
determine whether a stream is flowing to or from a lake or river,
compare the elevation of land features to that of the waterbody.
3. Use arrows to mark the direction of stream or wetland flow.
4. Find and mark the high points (hills, ridges, saddles) on the map. Then
connect these points, following ridges and crossing slopes at right
angles to contour lines. This line forms the watershed boundary.
If you don't need to know exact watershed boundaries, simply look at the
pattern of streamflow and draw lines dividing different stream systems. This
will give you an idea of the shape of your watershed and those that border it.
Also, once you've identified watershed boundaries, water features, and flow
direction, you might want to transfer this information to a road map for easier
use.
From: Eleanor Ely, Delineating a Watershed,
The Volunteer Monitor 6(2), Fall 1994.
Task 3 Conduct the background investigation
It is best to conduct your background investigation of the stream in the early stages of the
volunteer program and use the information it uncovers to help design the program's
monitoring plan, future activities, and projects.
The investigation might emphasize those aspects which are most important to the
volunteers or the watershed, or it might include all the resources and tools listed above. In
any case, rely on the interests of the volunteers in designing and conducting the
background investigation, and divide duties among different volunteers.
Once the investigation has been conducted, either the program coordinator or an
interested volunteer should compile the information collected and present it to other
volunteers in written form or at a programwide meeting. At a minimum, key information
on land uses, water uses, watershed boundaries, and dischargers should be maintained in
written form for program use and for volunteers who might join the program at a later
date. Maps, photographs, and other information on previous water quality studies in the
watershed will be of particular value to the program over time.
-------
Obtaining Aerial Photographs
Historic and current aerial photographs can be obtained from local, state, and
federal governments, as well as private firms. Try planning offices, highway
departments, soil and water conservation districts, state departments of
transportation, and universities.
Federal sources of aerial photographs include:
• USGS Earth Science
Information Center
507 National Center
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, VA 22092
1-800-USA-MAPS
• USDA Consolidated
Farm Service Agencies
Aerial Photography Field Office
222 West 2300 South
P.O. Box 30010
Salt Lake City, UT 84103-0010
801-524-5856
• Cartographic and Architectural Branch
National Archives and Records Administration
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, MD 20740-6001
301-713-7040
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
3.2
The Visual Assessment
To conduct the visual stream assessment portion of the watershed survey, volunteers
regularly walk, drive, and/or canoe along a defined stretch of stream observing water and
land conditions, land and water uses, and changes over time. These observations are
recorded on maps and on visual assessment data sheets and passed to the volunteer
coordinator, who can decide whether additional action is needed. Volunteers might
themselves follow up by reporting on problems such as fish kills, sloppy construction
practices, or spills they have identified during the visual assessment.
The basic steps to follow are:
Task 1 Determine the area to be assessed
The visual assessment will have most value if the same stream or segment of stream is
assessed each time. In this way, you will grow familiar with baseline stream conditions
and land and water uses, and will be better able to identify changes over time. You should
choose the largest area you feel comfortable assessing and ensure that it has easy, safe,
and legal access. The area should have recognizable boundaries that can be marked or
identified on road maps or U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps. This will help
future volunteers continue the visual assessment in later years and help the program
coordinator easily locate any problems that have been identified.
Once you have identified the area to be assessed, define it clearly in words (for example,
"Volunteer Creek from Bridge over Highway One to confluence of Happy Creek at
entrance to State Park"). Then, either draw the outline and significant features of the
stream and its surroundings on a blank sheet of paper or obtain a more detailed map of
the area, such as a plat, road, or neighborhood map. This will serve as the base map you
will use to mark stream obstructions, pollution sources, land uses, litter, spills, or other
problems identified during your visual assessment.
-------
Task 2 Determine when to survey
Because land and water uses can change rapidly and because the natural condition of the
stream might change with the seasons, it is best to visually assess the stream or stream
segment at least three times a year. In areas with seasonal changes, the best times to
survey are:
• Early spring, before trees and shrubs are in full leaf and when water levels are
generally high
• Late summer, when trees and shrubs are in full leaf and when water levels are
generally low
• Late fall, when trees and shrubs have dropped their leaves but before the onset of
freezing weather
In addition, you may wish to spotcheck potential problem areas more frequently. These
include construction sites, combined sewer overflow discharges, animal feedlots, or
bridge/highway crossings. If polluted runoff or failing septic systems are suspected,
schedule a survey during or after heavy rainfall. If a stream is diverted for irrigation
purposes, surveys during the summer season will identify whether water withdrawals are
affecting the stream.
Again, it is important to survey the stream at approximately the same time each season to
account for seasonal variations. You might find it productive to drive through the
watershed once a year and to walk the stream (or the stream's problem sites) at other
times (see Tasks 4 and 5).
Task 3 Gather necessary equipment
In addition to the general and safety equipment listed in Chapter 2, the following
equipment should be gathered before beginning the visual assessment:
• Reference map such as road map or USGS topographic map, to locate the stream
and the area to be assessed
• Base map to record land uses, land characteristics, stream obstructions, sources of
pollution, and landmarks
• Field data sheet
• Additional blank paper, to draw maps or take notes if needed
• Relevant information from background investigation (e.g., location of NPDES
outfalls, farms, abandoned mines, etc.)
Task 4 Drive (or walk) the watershed
The purpose of driving (or walking) the watershed is to get an overall picture of the land
that is drained by your stream or stream segment. It will help you understand what
problems to expect in your stream, and it will help you know where to look for those
problems.
-------
As with all other monitoring activities, you should undertake your watershed drive or
walk with at least one partner. If you are driving, one of you should navigate with a road
map and mark up the base map and field sheet with relevant discoveries while the other
partner drives. You might want to pull over to make detailed observations, particularly
near stream crossings. Remember never to enter private property without permission
(see section 2.3 - Safety Considerations).
As you drive or walk the watershed, look for the following:
• The "lay" of the land—become aware of hills, valleys, and flat terrain. Does any of
this area periodically flood?
• Bridges, dams, and channels—look for evidence of how the community has dealt
with the stream and its flood potential over the years. Are portions of it running
through concrete channels? Is it dammed, diverted, culverted, or straightened?
Where the road crosses the stream, is there evidence of erosion and pollution
beneath bridges? Is streamflow obstructed by debris hung up beneath bridges?
• Activities in the watershed—look for land use activities that might affect your
stream. In particular, look for construction sites, parking lots, manicured lawns,
farming, cattle crossings, mining, industrial and sewage treatment plant discharges,
open dumps, and landfills. Look for the outfalls you identified in your background
investigation. Also look for forested land, healthy riparian zones, undisturbed
wetlands, wildlife, and the presence of recreational users of the stream such as
swimmers or people fishing. (Note that heavy recreational use or large flocks of
birds might adversely affect the quality of streams, ponds, lakes, and wetlands.)
Task 5 Walk the stream
Where you have safe public access or permission to enter the stream, stop driving or
walking the watershed and go down to the stream. Use all of your senses to observe the
general water quality condition. Does the stream smell? Is it strewn with debris or
covered with an oily sheen or foam? Does it flow quickly or sluggishly? Is it clear or
turbid? Are the banks eroded? Is there any vegetation along the banks? If you see
evidence of water quality problems at a particular site, you might want to investigate
them in more detail. Drive or walk upstream as far as you can, and try to identify where
the water quality problem begins.
Use your field data sheet to record your findings. Always be as specific as possible when
noting your location and the water conditions you are observing. Draw new maps or take
pictures if that will help you remember what you are observing. Don't be afraid to take
too many notes or draw too many pictures. You can always sort through them later.
Take note of the positive conditions and activities you see as well as the negative ones.
This, too, will help you characterize the stream and its watershed. Look for such things as
people swimming or fishing in the stream; stable, naturally vegetated banks; fish and
waterfowl; or other signs that the stream is healthy.
-------
For more information on what to look for in and around the stream, consult Chapter 4
and, in particular, the Stream Habitat Walk.
Task 6 Review your maps/field data sheets
The last step of the watershed survey's visual assessment is to review the maps, drawings,
photos, and field data sheets you have assembled for your stream or stream segment.
What is this information telling you about problem sites, general stream condition,
potential for future degradation, and the need for additional action? In most cases you
will find that you have put together an interesting picture of your stream. This picture
might prompt additional monitoring or community activity, or could urge your program
coordinator to bring potential problems to the attention of water quality or public health
agencies in your area.
When reviewing your data, be sure maps are legible and properly identified, photos have
identifiable references, and field data sheets are filled out completely and accurately.
Your program coordinator might ask for your field data sheets, maps, and other material
and can probably help interpret the findings of your watershed survey.
References and Further Reading
Delaware Nature Education Center. 1996. Delaware Stream Watch Guide. July.
Ely, E. 1994. Delineating a Watershed. The Volunteer Monitor. 6(2):3.
Ely, E. 1994. LandUse Surveys. The Volunteer Monitor. 6(2): 19.
Gordon, N.D., T.A. McMahon, et al. 1992. Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for
Ecologists. John Wiley and Sons.
Kerr, M. and V. Lee. 1992. Volunteer Monitoring: Pipe Detectives Manual. March 1992.
Rhode Island Sea Grant, University of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Center.
Kerr, M. and V. Lee. 1992. Volunteer Monitoring: Shoreline Mapping Manual. March.
Rhode Island Sea Grant, University of Rhode Island, Coastal Resources Center.
Maryland Save Our Streams. Watershed Survey, Stream Survey, and Construction Site
Inventory (packets). Maryland Save Our Streams, 258 Scotts Manor Drive, Glen Burnie,
MD 21061.
Trautmann, N. and E. Barnaba. 1994. Aerial Photographs A Useful Monitoring Tool. The
Volunteer Monitor. 6(2): 17.
University of Rhode Island. 1990. Rhode Island Watershed Watch: Shoreline Survey
Manual for Lakes, Rivers, and Streams. Draft. June.
Yates, S. 1988. Adopting a Stream: A Northwest Handbook. Adopt-A-Stream
Foundation. University of Washington Press.
-------
For More Information on Your Watershed
EPA's Surf Your Watershed internet web site is a service designed to help
citizens locate, share, and use information on their watershed or community.
While you are conducting your watershed survey, you might find its features
of value. Surf provides:
• Access to a large listing of protection efforts and volunteer
opportunities by watershed.
• Information on water resources, drinking water sources, land use.
population, wastewater dischargers, and water quality conditions.
• Capabilities to generate maps of your watershed and determine the
latitude and longitude of specific sites within it.
• Opportunity to share your watershed information with other on-line
groups through links with other pages and databases.
You can reach Surf Your Watershed on the web at www.epa.gov/surf/.
Watershed Survey Visual Assessment (PDF, 15.0 KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe
Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is
also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
i Environmental Protection
Office of Water r b°me
Water Quality
Chapter 4
Macroinvertebrates and Habitat
4.1 - Stream Habitat Walk
4.2 - Streamside Biosurvey
4.3 - Intensive Stream Biosurvey
Biological monitoring, the study of biological organisms and their responses, is used to determine environmental
conditions. One type of biological monitoring, the biological survey or biosurvey, is described in this chapter. The
biosurvey involves collecting, processing, and analyzing aquatic organisms to determine the health of the biological
community in a stream.
In wadable streams (streams that can be easily walked across, with water no deeper than about thighhigh), the three
most common biological organisms studied are fish, algae, and macroinvertebrates. This manual discusses
macroinvertebrate monitoring only.
Macroinvertebrates are organisms that are large (macro) enough to be seen with the naked eye and lack a backbone
(invertebrate). They inhabit all types of running waters, from fastflowing mountain streams to slowmoving muddy
rivers. Examples of aquatic macroinvertebrates include insects in their larval or nymph form, crayfish, clams, snails,
and worms (Fig. 4.1). Most live part or most of their life cycle attached to submerged rocks, logs, and vegetation.
Aquatic macroinvertebrates are good indicators of stream quality because:
• They are affected by the physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the stream.
• They can't escape pollution and show the effects of short- and long term pollution events.
• They may show the cumulative impacts of pollution.
• They may show the impacts from habitat loss not detected by traditional water quality assessments.
• They are a critical part of the stream's food web.
• Some are very intolerant of pollution.
• They are relatively easy to sample and identify.
The basic principle behind the study of macroinvertebrates is that some are more sensitive to pollution than others.
Therefore, if a stream site is inhabited by organisms that can tolerate pollution and the more pollutionsensitive
organisms are missing a pollution problem is likely.
For example, stonefly nymphs aquatic insects that are very sensitive to most pollutants cannot survive if a stream's
dissolved oxygen falls below a certain level. If a biosurvey shows that no stoneflies are present in a stream that used
to support them, a hypothesis might be that dissolved oxygen has fallen to a point that keeps stoneflies from
reproducing or has killed them outright.
This brings up both the advantage and disadvantage of the biosurvey. The advantage of the biosurvey is that it tells
us very clearly when the stream ecosystem is impaired, or "sick," due to pollution or habitat loss. It is not difficult to
realize that a stream full of many kinds of crawling and swimming "critters" is healthier than one without much life.
The disadvantage of the biosurvey, on the other hand, is that it cannot definitively tell us why certain types of
creatures are present or absent.
In this case, the absence of stoneflies might indeed be due to low dissolved oxygen. But is the stream
-------
underoxygenated because it flows too sluggishly or because pollutants in the stream are damaging water quality by
using up the oxygen? The absence of stoneflies might also be due to other pollutants discharged by factories or
running off farmland, water temperatures that are too high, habitat degradation such as excess sand or silt on the
stream bottom that has ruined stonefly sheltering areas, or other conditions. Thus a biosurvey should be
accompanied by an assessment of habitat and water quality conditions in order to help explain biosurvey results.
Habitat, as it relates to the biosurvey, is defined as the space occupied by living organisms. In a stream, habitat for
macroinvertebrates includes the rocks and sediments of the stream bottom, the plants in and around the stream, leaf
litter and other decomposing organic material that falls into the stream, and submerged logs, sticks, and woody
debris. Macroinvertebrates need the shelter and food these habitats provide and tend to congregate in areas that
provide the best shelter, the most food, and the most dissolved oxygen. A habitat survey examines these aspects and
rates the stream according to their quality. This chapter includes both simple and intensive habitat surveys
volunteers can conduct.
Monitoring for water quality conditions such as low dissolved oxygen, temperature, nutrients, and pH helps identify
which pollutants are responsible for impacts to a stream. Water quality monitoring is discussed in Chapter 5.
Uses of the Biosurvey and Habitat Assessment
The information provided by biosurveys and habitat assessments can be used for many purposes.
• Biosurveys can be used to identify problem sites along a stream. A habitat assessment can help determine
whether the problem is due, at least in part, to a habitat limitation such as poor bank conditions.
• To identify the impact of pollution and of pollution control activities. Because macroinvertebrates are
stationary and are sensitive to different degrees of pollution, changes in their abundance and variety vividly
illustrate the impact pollution is having on the stream. Loss of macroinvertebrates in the stream, or of trees
along the stream bank, are environmental impacts that a wide segment of society can relate to. Similarly,
when a pollution control activity takes place say, a fence is built to keep cows out of the stream a biosurvey
may show that the sensitive macroinvertebrates have returned and a habitat assessment might find that the
formerly eroded stream banks have recovered.
• To determine the severity of the pollution problem and to rank stream sites. To use biological data properly,
water resource analysts generally compare the results from the stream sites under study to those of sites in
ideal or nearly ideal condition (called a reference condition). Individual stream sites can then be ranked from
best to worst, and priorities can be set for their improvement.
• To determine support of aquatic life uses. All states designate their waters for certain specific uses, such as
swimming or as cold water fishery. States establish specific standards (limits on pollutants) identifying what
concentrations of chemical pollutants are allowable if designated stream uses are to be maintained.
Increasingly, states are also developing biological criteria essentially, statements of what biological conditions
should be in various types of streams throughout the state. States are required by the Clean Water Act to
report on those waters which do not support their designated uses.
Biological surveys directly examine the aquatic organisms in streams and the stressors that affect them.
Therefore, these surveys are ideal tools to use in determining whether a stream's designated aquatic life uses
are supported.
• To identify water quality trends. In any given site, biological data can be used to identify water quality trends
(increasing or decreasing) over several years.
Designing a Biosurvey Program
In most cases, this manual recommends that local aquatic biologists assist in the development of volunteer
biological monitoring programs. This is because the types of habitats and organisms in streams vary widely with
geography and climate. Tools as basic as macroinvertebrate identification keys might need to be adapted to local
conditions.
Many volunteer monitoring programs rely for assistance on aquatic biologists working for state water-quality or
natural resource agencies. Others are assisted by university personnel, hire their own expert staff, or contract out for
consulting services. Whatever the source of expertise, professional guidance is essential for creating a successful
biosurvey program. This manual strongly recommends a close level of coordination with state or local agencies
-------
that might use the data volunteers collect.
Monitoring approaches—and the level of professional guidance and assistance needed—clearly vary with
and resources of individual volunteer groups. Therefore, this manual presents three different approaches
biological monitoring.
• Stream Habitat Walk (detailed
in section 4.1) is for groups
the goals
or tiers to
Taxonomic Classification
Scientists have developed a system for classifying all
living creatures based on shared characteristics
(taxonomic classification). It is a tiered system that
begins on a large scale (i.e., Animal Kingdom/Plant
Kingdom) and works its way down to the level of
individual species. To illustrate, the burrowing
mayfly is classified as folows.
Kingdom: Animal
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Insecta
Order: Ephemeroptera
Family: Ephemerida
Genus: Hexagenia
Species: limbata
focused primarily on educating
volunteers about their streams
and for identifying severe
pollution problems. Volunteers
conduct simple visual
assessments of habitat to gain a
greater appreciation of local
stream ecology.
It is based on a protocol known
as Streamwalk developed by
the EPA Region 10 Office in
Seattle, Washington, and is
widely used by volunteers
throughout the Pacific
Northwest.
Streamside Biosurvey (detailed
in section 4.2) trains volunteers
to collect macroinvertebrates
and identify them to order level
(stonefly, mayfly, caddisfly,
etc.) in the field. Monitors
evaluate the macroinvertebrate
community structure by sorting
specimens into three general
sensitivity categories. In
addition, volunteers
characterize habitat by
conducting a modified Stream
Habitat Walk.
This tier is based on a protocol
developed by the Ohio
Department of Natural
Resources and adapted by the
Izaak Walton League of
America. It has been used by
volunteer monitors nationwide,
including programs in Ohio,
Tennessee, Georgia, Virginia,
Kentucky, Illinois, and West
Virginia.
Intensive Biosurvey (detailed in section 4.3) requires that volunteers work under the supervision of
professional aquatic biologists. Volunteers undergo formal training and conduct quality-controlled sampling
and analysis. Using microscopes in a laboratory setting, macroinvertebrates are identified to the family level
(what types of stoneflies, mayflies, caddisflies, etc.). Analytical techniques are subsequently applied to the
data to draw conclusions about the biological health of the sampled site. This rigorous biosurvey approach
results in data that can yield information on subtle stream impacts and trends.
Based primarily on EPA's Rapid Bioassessment Protocols, this approach has been adapted by Mary-land Save
-------
Our Streams, the River Watch Network and other groups.
We have modified the approaches used by other groups to add to their capabilities or to make them more generally
applicable to all U.S. streams. Individual programs might choose to start with the simplest, least resource-intensive
approach and work their way toward increasing complexity as resources, expertise, and volunteer interest allow.
However, groups might decide to begin with a more complex approach that better suits their program goals. Table
4.1 illustrates some of the key differences in the three biological monitoring approaches discussed in this manual.
Protocol Stream Habitat Streamside Intensive ^^^^^1
Elements Walk Biosurvey Biosurvey H^^Bl
Program
Objectives
Complexity
of Approach
Resource
Investment
Training
• Education/public
awareness
• Gross problem
indentifi cation/screening
• Simple visual
assessment of habitat and
physical characteristics
• Basic observational
biological data recording
general abundance/variety
of macroinvertebrates and
presence or absence of
macrophytes, algae, and
fish
• Scientific personnel
assist in project design,
preparation of
documentation, and
orientation of volunteers
• Minimal equipment
(maps, manuals, forms)
• Primarily
self-instructional
• Education/public
awareness
• Problem
identification/screening
• Preliminary ranking of
sites for further study
• Visual assessment of
habitat and physical
characteristics
• In-streaming biota
collected and evaluated at
streamside for relative
sensitivity /tolerance and
identified to order/family
level
• Scientific personnel
involved in project
design, preparation of
documentation, training,
and supervision of
biosurveys
• Sampling gear, maps,
manuals, forms,
references
• Periodic workshops
and streamside training
sessions
• Education/public
awareness
• Problem
identification/screening
• Assessing severity of
problems
• Ranking of sites for
management action
• Comprehensive habitat
and physical assessment
• Instream biota
collected, preserved, and
identified in lab to family
level (multimetric
approach)
• Reference sites or
conditions identified
• Scientific personnel
active in all levels and
mandatory for assessment
and data interpretation
• Laboratory and storage
facilities in addition to
other equipment
• Voucher and reference
collections required
• Formal lab and field
training with experienced
team leaders before all
assessments
1 ' ' r ' r
1 ' ' 1 ' '
',' i is >
,1 , i ' ! ( i , '
' ' '
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home | Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home I Office of Water I Search I Comments
-------
EnvironmentalProtection
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
4.1
Stream Habitat Walk
The Stream Habitat Walk is an easy-to-use approach for identifying and assessing the elements of a stream's
habitat. It is based on a simple protocol known as Streamwalk, developed by EPA's Regional Office in Seattle,
Washington and consists primar ily of visual observation of stream habitat characteristics, wildlife present, and
gross physical attributes. A simple in-stream macroinvertebrate evaluation can also be performed. This approach
requires little in the way of equipment and training.
The Stream Habitat Walk is most useful as:
• A screening tool to identify severe water quality problems
• A vehicle for learning about stream ecosystems and environmental stewardship
Because the Stream Habitat Walk is not scientifically rigorous, data from this approach are less likely to be used
by state and local water quality management agencies than are data from other biological monitoring approaches.
However, the Stream Habitat Walk's ease of use, adaptability, and low cost make it a highly attractive approach
for many programs whose primary focus is public awareness and citizen involvement.
Step 1-Prepare for the Walk
TASK 1 Schedule your Habitat Walk
To provide data that accurately characterize your stream and can be used to document general trends in your area,
you should walk the same site at least three times a year, during different seasons. It is usually best to visit your
site in early spring, 1 ate summer, and fall if you live in a part of the country that experiences seasonal variations
in leaf cover, vegetation growth, and water flow. It is a good idea to check with a local aquatic biologist for
assistance in determining the best times to schedule monitoring. For purposes of accuracy and consistency, it i s
best to monitor the same site from year to year and at the same time of the year (e.g., in the spring and, more
specifically, in the same month).
TASK 2 Obtain a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map of your
area
One of the most valuable tools for conducting stream monitoring work is a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
topographic map. These "topo" maps display many important features of the landscape including elevations,
waterways, roads, and buildings. They are cri tical tools for defining the watershed of your study stream. (See
Chapter 3 for a discussion of topographic maps.)
TASK 3 Select and mark the Habitat Walk location(s)
Choosing the location for stream monitoring is a task defined by the goals of your individual program. Program
managers may select sites themselves or in collaboration with local or state water quality personnel. Other
programs allow their volunteers to c hoose the site based on their personal interests. (See Chapter 2 for a
discussion on choosing monitoring locations.) If a Watershed Survey is conducted (see Chapter 3), this
information should play a role in deciding which areas are the best candidates for the Stream Habitat Walk.
-------
Once a monitoring site is chosen, it should be marked on the topo map. This will document the location and serve
as a record in case future volunteers or data users need to find the site.
TASK 4 Become familiar with safety procedures
Volunteers must always keep safety in mind while conducting any stream monitoring activity. Provide all Stream
Habitat Walk participants with a list of safety do's and don'ts and have them review this list thoroughly. Chapter
3 covers several important safety concerns that should be incorporated into a stream monitoring program.
Remember, volunteer safety is more important than the data. Some reminders include:
• Let someone know where you're going and when you expect to return. Make sure you have an "in case of
emergency" phone number with you before leaving for the field.
• Do not cross streams in high flows.
• Never go into the field alone; always work in teams of at least two people.
• If for any reason you feel unsafe, do not attempt to monitor on that day.
TASK 5 Gather equipment and tools for the Habitat Walk
There is nothing more frustrating than arriving at a field monitoring site and not having all your equipment and
supplies. Providing volunteers with a checklist of necessary items will help keep them organized. In addition to
the basic equipment listed in Chapter 2, you will need the following for the Stream Habitat Walk. For locating the
site
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map of the stream area (supplemented by regular street map if
needed)
For recording observations
• Stream Habitat Walk field data sheet
For marking-off the stream stretch of study
• Tape measure, string, or twine (25 yards)
For working in and around the stream
• Thermometer for measuring water temperature (Scientific supply houses sell armored thermometers that
are best suited for this purpose, although you can obtain a good thermometer from an aquarium store. Some
thermometers need to be calibrated befor e use. See Chapter 5 for instruction on calibrating and using
thermometers.)
• Watch with a second hand or a stopwatch
For observing macroinvertebrates (optional)
• A bucket
• A shallow white pan. (Alternatives: white plastic plate or the bottom of a white plastic detergent jug)
• Tweezers or soft brush
• Ice cube trays (for sorting macroinvertebrates)
• Magnifying glass
TASK 6 Become familiar with the Stream Habitat Walk field data sheet and
the definitions of its elements
It is important to become familiar with the Stream Habitat Walk field data sheet and its instructions before you
begin your Stream Habitat Walk. If you are unclear about any instructions when you are conducting your Walk,
just leave that space blank and k eep going. You might wish to contact your volunteer program coordinator for
further explanation after you have completed your Walk.
At the end of this section is a sample field data sheet. You might find it necessary to modify this sheet slightly to
better meet the needs of your volunteers, your ecological region, and your program. When you fill out your field
-------
data sheet, base your re sponses on your best judgment of conditions in a stretch of stream that includes about 50
yards both upstream and downstream of the place where you are standing. If you identify features and problems
beyond your chosen 100-yard length, feel free to note t hem on your map and form. You might want to conduct
additional Walks in the area where those features are found.
Instructions on how to fill out the field data sheet are included right on the form. They are also covered in an
expanded format, with illustrations, in this text. Although many of the required measures are relatively
self-explanatory, it might be a good idea to make copies of these instructions for all volunteer teams to take into
the field as an additional training tool.
Step 2-Delineate and sketch your site
TASK 1 Delineate the site
Using your tape measure or 25 yards of string or twine, measure off four 25-yard lengths alongside the stream for
a total of 100 yards. Start from a point of reference such as a tree, large rock, or bend in the stream.
TASK 2 Sketch your site on the field data sheet
On the field data sheet, sketch the 100-yard section of stream. (Fig. 4.3). Drawing the map will familiarize you
with the terrain and stream features and provide you and other volunteers with a visual record of your habitat
walk. You should walk the 100-y ard length from at least one bank.
On your sketch, note features such as riffles, runs, pools, ditches, wetlands, dams, riprap, outfalls, tributaries,
landscape features, jogging paths, vegetation, and roads. Use your topo map or a compass to determine which
direction is north and mark it on your sketch. If you see important features outside your 100-yard length of
stream, mark them on your sketch but note that they are outside the stream reach. Remember to use pencil or
waterproof ink when drawing your map or filling out the field dat a sheets because regular ink will run if wet.
-------
-•. <<' .*?'' .'-'.
Select a 25-yard section of the site. You will be filling out your field data sheet for this section only. Mark the
section on the sketch. If you want to conduct multiple walks, choose another 25-yard section or move to an
entirely different location. Eve n though you will only be completing the data forms for the 25 yard reach, it is
important to sketch the full 100-yard section so that you can document the stream features surrounding the
evaluated reach.
-------
TASK 3 Complete the top portion of your field data sheet
Include stream name, date, and county (or appropriate local designation) of your site, and describe its location as
precisely as possible. It is best to stand at or near a permanent marker such as a bridge, abutment, or road.
Remember, you or another volu nteer will be coming back to the same spot again and again, so be as specific as
you can. Some programs might ask you for the latitude and longitude of your location; others might ask for a map
reference number or other site identifier.
Latitude and longitude information is critical for mapping and for many data management programs. It is also
required if the data is to be entered in USEPA's STOrage and RETrieval System (STORET) or used in a
Geographical Information System (GIS).
An easy way to determine latitude and longitude is to use a global positioning system (GPS), a hand-held tool that
looks like a calculator. GPS units receive signals form orbiting satellites and then use the information from the
satellites to calculate th e lat/long coordinates of the user. In general, these tools are accurate up to 15 meters.
GPS units are relatively inexpensive and can be purchased from scientific supply houses and many camping or
outdoor stores. Many government agencies are using GPS an d might be able to loan a system to your program.
Latitude and longitude can also be calculated manually using a USGS topographical map and a ruler (See
Appendix C).
Step 3-Conduct the Stream Habitat Walk
Detailed instructions for performing the Stream Habitat Walk begin on page 48 of this section.
TASK 1 Complete the habitat characterization components of the walk for
the 25-yard section of stream: the "In-Stream Characteristics," "Stream
Bank and Channel Characteristics," and "Local Watershed
Characteristics" sections of the field data sheet
These elements involve making observations about the stream itself as well as the riparian zone and immediate
watershed.
TASK 2 Complete the "Visual Biological Survey" section of the field data
sheet
This involves simple visual observations of the presence or absence of wildlife and obvious aquatic life in the
stream, including fish, aquatic plants, and algae.
TASK 3 Complete the "Macroinverte-brate Survey" section of the field data
sheet
This is optional and serves as an introduction to the types of life that inhabit some of the microhabitats of the
stream the spaces under and on rocks and in and on twigs and leaves. To conduct this survey, you will need to
select the method(s) that best suits your stream. Use the rock-rubbing method in streams with riffles, or use the
stick-picking method if your stream does not have riffles. Clumps of submerged leaves may be present in either
type of stream and are often an important microhabitat for ma croinvertebrates. You may choose to sort through
these leaf packs in addition to rock-rubbing or stick-picking.
You will also need some specific equipment (a bucket, tweezers, picnic plate, etc.). Be sure to dress appropriately
because you'll probably get wet.
Remember to return the organisms to the stream when you finish the macroinvertebrate survey. Then, check to
make sure your field data sheet has been completed as fully as possible.
-------
Step 4-Check data forms for completeness and return forms to program
coordinator
After completing the habitat characterization and biological survey, make sure you have completed the field data
sheet to the extent possible and that the recorded data are legible. If you are not able to determine how to answer a
question on the field da ta sheet, just leave the space blank. If you leave a space blank, indicate that it is because
you are not able to answer the question (e.g., write "not able to answer" or "does not apply" in the space).
Upon completion of the Stream Habitat Walk, present a copy of the field data sheet to your volunteer program
coordinator. You may want to keep a copy of the field data sheet, and other appropriate data, for your own
records and to evaluate any future disc repancies in the data. If you have identified an urgent problem, such as
leaking drums of chemicals, foul odors, or fish kills, contact your program coordinator or the agency with
whom you are working as soon as possible.
Instructions for completing the Stream Habitat Walk
data sheet
*
For ease of use, the following numbered instructions correspond to the numbers on the field data sheet.
-------
In-stream Characteristics
1. Pools, riffles, and runs. A mixture of flows and depth and pro vide a variety of habitats to support fish and
invertebrate life. Pools are deep with slow water. Riffles are shallow with fast, turbulent water running over
rocks. Runs are deep with fast water and little or no turbulence.
2. Stream bottom (substrate) is the material on the stream bottom. Identify what substrate types are present.
Substrate types include:
o Silt/clay/mud. This substrate has a sticky, cohesive feeling. The particles are fine. The spaces
between the particles hold a lot of water, making the sediments behave like ooze.
O Sand (up to 0.1 inch). A sandy bottom is made up of tiny, gritty particles of rock that are smaller
than gravel but coarser than silt (gritty, up to ladybug size).
O Gravel (0.1-2 inches). A gravel bottom is made up of stones ranging from tiny quarter-inch pebbles
to rocks of about 2 inches (fine gravel - pea size to marble size; coarse gravel - marble to tennis ball
size).
O Cobbles (2-10 inches). Most rocks on this type of stream bottom are between 2 and 10 inches
(between a tennis ball and a basketball).
O Boulders (greater than 10 inches). Most of the rocks on the bottom are greater than 10 inches
(between a basketball and a car in size).
O Bedrock. This kind of stream bottom is solid rock (or rocks bigger than a car).
3. Embeddedness is the extent to which rocks (gravel,
cobbles, and boulders) are sunken into the silt, sand,
or mud of the stream bottom (Fig. 4.5). Generally,
the more rocks are embedded, the less rock surface
or space between rocks is available as habitat for
aquatic macroinvertebrates and for fish spawning.
Excessive silty runoff from erosion can increase a
stream's embedded-ness. To estimate
embeddedness, observe the amount of silt or finer
sediments overlying, in between, and surrounding
the rocks.
4. Presence of logs or woody debris (not twigs and
leaves) in stream can slow or divert water to
provide important fish habitat such as pools and
hiding places. Mark the box that describes the
general amount of woody debris in the stream.
5. Naturally occurring organic material in stream.
This material includes leaves and twigs. Mark the
box that describes the general amount of organic
matter in the stream.
6. Water appearance can be a physical indicator of
water pollution.
O Clear - colorless, transparent
O Milky - cloudy-white or grey, not transparent;
might be natural or due to pollution
O Foamy - might be natural or due to pollution,
generally detergents or nutrients (foam that is
several inches high and does not brush apart
easily is generally due to some sort of
pollution)
O Turbid - cloudy brown due to suspended silt
-------
"^ "-.:&&'
or organic material
O Dark brown - might indicate that acids are
being released into the stream due to •—
decaying plants .'.,'.)'''.'.•',•" • !'!T';.'^ ••'' '.'Y'-i,'"'"""'"" ' ''"''! '•'::''''"'--*'
O Oily sheen - multicolored reflection might ,
indicate oil floating in the stream, although
some sheens are natural
O Orange - might indicate acid drainage
O Green - might indicate excess nutrients being
released into the stream
7. Water odor can be a physical indicator of water pollution
o No smell or a natural odor
o Sewage - might indicate the release of human waste material
O Chlorine - might indicate over-chlorinated sewage treatment/water treatment plant or swimming
pool discharges
o Fishy - might indicate excessive algal growth or dead fish
O Rotten eggs - might indicate sewage pollution (the presence of methane from anaerobic conditions)
8. Water temperature can be particularly important for determining the suitability of the stream as aquatic
habitat for some species offish and macroinvertebrates that have distinct temperature requirements.
Temperature also has a direct effe ct on the amount of dissolved oxygen available to the aquatic organisms.
Measure temperature by submerging a thermometer for at least 2 minutes in a typical stream run. Repeat
once and average the results.
Stream Bank and Channel Characteristics
9. Depth of runs and pools should be determined by estimating the vertical distance from the surface to the
stream bottom at a representative depth at each of the two habitats.
10. The width of the stream channel can be determined by estimating the width of the streambed that is covered
by water from bank to bank. If it varies widely, estimate an average width.
11. Stream velocity can have a direct influence on the health, variety, and abundance of aquatic communities. If
water flows too quickly, organisms might be unable to maintain their hold on rocks and vegetation and be
washed downstream; if wate r flows too slowly, it might provide insufficient aeration for species needing
high levels of dissolved oxygen. Stream velocity can be affected by dams, channelization, terrain, runoff,
and other factors. To measure stream velocity, mark off a 20-foot sec tion of stream run and measure the
time it takes a stick, leaf, or other floating biodegradable object to float the 20 feet. Repeat 3 times and pick
the average time. Divide the distance (20 feet) by the average time (seconds) to determine the velocity in
feet per second. (See Chapter 5, section 5.1 on flow for a more indepth discussion of using a float to
estimate velocity.
12. The shape of the stream bank, the extent of artificial modifications, and the shape of the stream channel are
determined by standing at the downstream end of the 25-yard section and looking upstream.
• The shape of the stream bank (Fig. 4.6) may include.
• Vertical or undercut bank - a bank that rises vertically or overhangs the stream. This type of
bank generally provides good cover for macroinvertebrates and fish and is resistant to erosion.
However, if seriously undercut, it might be vulne rable to collapse.
• Steeply sloping - a bank that slopes at more than a 30 degree angle. This type of bank is very
vulnerable to erosion.
• Gradual sloping - a bank that has a slope of 30 degrees or less. This type of stream bank is
highly resistant to erosion, but does not provide much streamside cover.
• Artificial bank modifications include all artificial structural changes to the stream bank such as riprap
(broken rock, cobbles, or boulders placed on earth surfaces such as the face of a dam or the bank of a
-------
Gradually sloping
--,vv :» .• -%--' u'
stream, for protection against the action of
the water) and bulkheads. Determine the
approximate percentage of each bank (both
the left and right) that is artificially
covered by the placement of rocks, wood,
or concrete.
• The shape of the stream channel can be
described as narrow (less than 6 feet wide
from bank to bank), wide (more than 6 feet
from bank to bank), shallow (less than 3
feet deep from the stream substrate to the
top of the banks) or deep (more than 3 feet
from the stream substrate to the top of the
banks). Choose the category that best
describes the channel.
• Narrow, deep
• Narrow, shallow
• Wide, deep
• Wide, shallow
13. Streamside cover information helps determine
the quality and extent of the stream's riparian
zone. This information is important at the stream ' '*
bank itself and for a distance away from the
stream bank. For example, trees, bushes, and tall
gr ass can contribute shade and cover for fish and
wildlife and can provide the stream with needed
organic material such as leaves and twigs. Lawns
indicate that the stream's riparian zone has been
altered, that pesticides and grass clippings are a
possible problem, and that little habitat and
shading are available. Bare soil and pavement
might indicate problems with erosion and runoff.
Looking upstream, provide this information for
the left and right banks of the stream.
• Evergreen trees (conifers) - cone-bearing trees that do not lose their leaves in winter.
• Hardwood trees (deciduous) - in general, trees that shed their leaves at the end of the growing season.
• Bushes, shrubs - conifers or deciduous bushes less than 15 feet high.
• Tall grass, ferns, etc. - includes tall natural grasses, ferns, vines, and mosses.
• Lawn - cultivated and maintained short grass.
• Boulders - rocks larger than 10 inches.
• Gravel/cobbles/sand - rocks smaller than 10 inches; sand.
• Bare soil
• Pavement, structure - any structures or paved areas, including paths, roads, bridges, houses, etc.
14. Stream shading is a measurement of the extent to which the stream itself is overhung and shaded by the
cover identified in 13 above. This shade (or overhead canopy) provides several important functions in the
stream habitat. The canopy cool s the water; offers habitat, protection, and refuge for aquatic organisms;
and provides a direct source of beneficial organic matter and insects to the stream. Determine the extent to
which vegetation shades the stream at your site.
15. General conditions of the stream bank and stream channel, and other conditions that might be affecting the
stream are determined by standing at the downstream end of the 25-yard site and looking upstream. Provide
observations for the right and left banks of the stream.
-------
• Stream bank conditions that might be affecting the stream.
O Natural plant cover degraded. Note whether streamside vegetation is trampled or missing or has
been replaced by landscaping, cultivation, or pavement. (These conditions could lead to erosion.)
O Banks collapsed/eroded. Note whether banks or parts of banks have been washed away or worn
down. (These conditions could limit habitats in the area.)
O Garbage/junk adjacent to the stream. Note the presence of litter, tires, appliances, car bodies,
shopping carts, and garbage dumps.
O Foam or sheen on bank. Note whether there is foam or an oily sheen on the stream bank. Sheen may
indicate an oil spill or leak, and foam may indicate the presence of detergent.
• Stream channel conditions that might be affecting the stream.
O Mud/silt/sand on bottom/entering stream. Excessive mud or silt can interfere with the ability of fish
to sight potential prey. It can clog fish gills and smother fish eggs in spawning areas in the stream
bottom. It can be an indication of p oor construction practices, urban area runoff, silviculture
(forestry-related activities), or agriculture in the watershed. It can also be a normal condition,
especially in a slow-moving, muddy-bottom stream.
O Garbage or junk in stream. Note the presence of litter, tires, appliances, car bodies, shopping carts,
and garbage.
• Other general conditions that might be affecting the stream.
O Yard waste (e.g., grass clippings) - is there evidence that grass clippings, cut branches, and other
types of yard waste have been dumped into the stream?
O Livestock in or with unrestricted access to stream - are livestock present, or is there an obvious path
that livestock use to get to the water from adjacent fields? Is there streamside degradation caused by
livestock?
O Actively discharging pipes - are there pipes with visible openings discharging fluids or water into the
stream? Note such pipes even though you may not be able to tell where they come from or what they
are discharging.
O Other pipes - are there pipes near or entering the stream? Note such pipes even if you cannot find an
opening or see matter being discharged.
O Ditches - are there ditches, draining the surrounding land and leading into the stream?
Local watershed characteristics
16. Adjacent land uses can potentially have a great impact on the quality and state of the stream and
riparian areas. Determine the land uses, based on your own judgment of the activities in the
watershed surrounding your site within a quarter of a mile. Enter a "1" if a land use is present and a
"2" if it is clearly having a negative impact on the stream.
Visual biological survey
17. Wildlife in the stream area might indicate it is of sufficient quality to support animals with food,
water, and habitat. Look for signs of frogs, turtles, snakes, ducks, deer, beaver, etc.
18. Are fish present in the stream? Fish can indicate that the stream is of sufficient quality for other
organisms. Indicate the average size and note any visible barriers to the movement offish in the
stream obstructions that would keep fish from moving freely upstream or downstream.
19. Aquatic plants provide food and cover for aquatic organisms. Plants also might provide very general
indications of stream quality. For example, streams that are overgrown with plants could be over
enriched by nutrients. Streams devoid of pi ants could be affected by extreme acidity or toxic
pollutants. Aquatic plants may also be an indicator of stream velocity because plants cannot take root
in fast-flowing streams.
20. Algae are simple plants that do not grow true roots, stems, or leaves and that mainly live in water,
providing food for the food chain. Algae may grow on rocks, twigs, or other submerged materials, or
-------
float on the surface of the water. The algae naturally occurs in green and brown colors. Excessive
algal growth may indicate excessive nutrients (organic matter or a pollutant such as fertilizer) in the
stream.
Macroinvertebrate survey (optional)
21. Macroinvertebrates are organisms that lack a backbone and can be seen with the naked eye such as
clams, mussels, snails, worms, crayfish, and larval insects. To locate macroinvertebrates in the
stream, use one or more of the following metho ds.
• Rock-rubbing method. (Use this method in streams with riffle areas and rocky bottoms.)
• Remove several rocks from within a riffle area of your stream site (e.g., randomly pick
1 rock from each side of the stream, 1 rock from the middle, and 1 rock from in
between). Try to choose rocks that are submerged during normal flow conditions. Each
rock should be about 4-6 inches in diameter and should be easily moved (not
embedded).
• Either inspect the rock's surface for any living organisms or place the rock in a
light-colored bucket or shallow pan, add some stream water, and brush the rock with a
soft brush or your hands. Try to dislodge the foreign particles from the rock's surface.
Also look for clumps of gravel or leaves stuck to the rock. These clumps may be
caddisfly houses and should be dislodged as well.
• Stick-picking method. (Use this method in streams without riffles or without a rock bottom.)
• Collect several sticks (approximately 1 inch in diameter and relatively short) from
inside the stream site, and place then in a bucket filled with stream water. Select
partially decomposed objects that have soft, pulpy wood and a lot of crevices a nd are
found in the flowing water, not buried in the bottom. Pick the loose bark from the sticks
to find organisms.
• Fill the shallow pan with water from the stream and remove one of the sticks from the
bucket. Examine the stick making sure you hold it over the pan so no organisms are
lost. Remember that the organisms will have sought shelter, and they could be hiding in
loose bark or crevices. After examining the sticks, it might be helpful to break up the
woody material. Examine each stick carefully. Using tweezers or a soft brush, carefully
remove anything that resembles a living organism and place it in the pan. Also examine
the bucket contents for anything that has fallen off the sticks.
• Leaf pack-sorting method. (This method can be used in streams with or without a rock
bottom.)
• Remove several handfuls of submerged leaves from the stream and place them into a
bucket. Remove the leaves one at a time and look closely for the presence of insects.
Using tweezers or soft brush, carefully remove anything that resembles a living
organism and place it in a pan containing stream water. Also examine the bucket
contents to see if anything has fallen off the leaves.
22. Note whether you have found any macroinvertebrates using one of the above methods.
23. After collecting macroinvertebrates using any of the above methods, examine the types of organisms
by gross morphological features (e.g., snails or worm-like). Use a magnifying glass to observe the
organisms in water so you can clearly see the leg s, gills, and tails. Note the relative abundance of
each type on the field data sheet. When finished, return all the organisms to the stream.
Many types of macroinvertebrates can be found in a healthy stream. Because different species can
tolerate different levels of pollution, observing the variety and abundance of macroinvertebrates can
give you a sense of the stream's health. For exam pie, if pollution tolerant organisms are plentiful and
pollution intolerant ones are found only occasionally, this might indicate a problem in the stream.
Types of organisms you find may include:
• Worm-like organisms (like worms and leeches) either adhere to rocks or sticks or move
slowly. They are generally tolerant of pollution.
-------
• Crayfish look like lobsters or shrimp. They are generally somewhat tolerant of pollution.
• Snail-like organisms include snails and clam-like organisms. They range from somewhat
tolerant of pollution to somewhat intolerant.
• Insects include a wide variety of organisms that generally have distinct legs, head, bodies, and
tails and often move quickly over rocks or sticks. They come in many sizes and shapes as well
as a wide range of pollution-tolerance levels.
When finished, return all organisms to the stream.
Stream Habitat Walk (PDF, 137.0KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader is
available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home I Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Utilise! Slalis
EnMlronmenlal Protection Agency
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
4.2
Streamside Biosurvey
The Streamside Biosurvey is based on the simple macroinvertebrate sampling approach developed and used by the Ohio
Department of Natural Resources and the Izaak Walton League of America's Save Our Streams program and adapted by many
volunteer monitoring programs throughout the United States.
This assessment approach has two basic components. The first is abiosurvey of aquatic organisms that involves collecting and
identifying macroinvertebrates in the field and calculating an index of stream quality. The second is the habitat
characterization method known as the Streamside Biosurvey Habitat Walk.
Two methods of macroinvertebrate sampling are detailed in this section one for rocky-bottom streams (using a kick net) and
one for muddy-bottom streams (using a dip net). Figure 4.7 illustrates and describes the nets used for these assessments. Both
of these aquatic organism collection procedures have been widely tested and used successfully by many groups. You should
consult with a local aquatic scientist to determine which method is appropriate for streams in your area.
Like the Stream Habitat Walk described in Section 4.1, the Streamside
Biosurvey is useful as a screening tool to identify water quality problems
and as an educational tool to teach volunteers about pollution and stream
ecology. But instead of randomly picking up rocks or sticks and
brushing off macroinvertebrates for simple observation purposes,
Streamside Bio-survey volunteers are trained to use special nets and
standardized sampling protocols to collect organisms from a measured
area of stream habitat. Volunteers identify collected organisms, usually
to the order level, and sort them into taxonomic groups based on their
ability to tolerate pollution. Using this information, volunteers can then
calculate a simple stream quality rating of good, fair, or poor.
Because the Streamside Biosurvey involves a standardized sampling
protocol, a basic level of training, professional assistance, and a simple
stream rating based on macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance, this
approach is more effective than the Stream Habitat Walk in
characterizing stream health and determining general water quality
trends over several years. However, this method is not generally suited
to determining subtle pollution impacts due, in part, to its uncomplicated
level of macroinvertebrate identification and analysis. This, of course, is
also one of the Streamside Biosurvey's greatest strengths, since
volunteers can be easily trained in its methods.
Key features of the Streamside Biosurvey are as follows:
• It includes the Streamside Biosurvey Habitat Walk as its physical
habitat characterization and visual biological characterization
components. This protocol is a somewhat more detailed version of
the Stream Habitat Walk described in Section 4.1.
• It centers around a macroinvertebrate survey in which organisms
are collected according to specific protocols, identified in the field
(generally to taxonomic order), and are then released back into the
stream.
• For the identification process, volunteers group
macroinvertebrates into three categories based on their pollution
tolerance or sensitivity. Volunteers then calculate a water quality
index by counting the specimens in each sensitivity category and
Note
The Streamside Biosurvey is based on protocols
developed and widely used by programs such as
the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the
Izaak Walton League of America, and others. This
manual recommends some modifications to their
established protocols. These include:
• A finer mesh size for the kick and dip nets
used to sample for macroinvertebrates
• In rocky-bottom streams, compositing three
samples into one before identifying
macroinvertebrates rather than identifying
macroinvertebrates in three separate
samples and choosing the best result.
Compositing generally provides a more
representative sample of the
macroinvertebrate community than a
discrete sample taken from one part of the
riffle. Riffle areas have what is known as a
patchy distribution of organisms, meaning
that different types of organisms are
naturally found in different parts of the
riffle. In order to more accurately assess the
macroinvertebrate community in a
rocky-bottom stream site, it is important to
take a representative sample that includes
organisms found in different
microhabitats—such as in different parts of
the riffle or in riffles of various flows and
depths.
• A new method for calculating the stream
quality rating. This modification
incorporates a weighting factor to take into
account the abundance of organisms in each
-------
pollution tolerance category
(pollution-sensitive, somewhat tolerant, and
tolerant).
In muddy-bottom streams, varying how
much each habitat type is sampled
depending on its abundance at the sampling
site.
determining whether they are rare, common, or dominant;
multiplying the number of taxa in each category by a weighting
factor; adding all the scores; and comparing results to a water
quality rating scale that has been determined by a locally
knowledgeable biologist/ecologist.
• The Streamside Biosurvey requires some equipment and training.
Training can be conducted at the stream site, although some
advance preparation is required. For example, a biologist with
regional experience should assist in developing the
macroinvertebrate key and the tolerance category groupings on
the field data sheets. A reference collection is recommended to
help volunteers identify macroinvertebrates.
Step 1 Prepare for the Streamside Biosurvey field work
Much of the preparation work for this approach is similar to that of the Stream Habitat Walk (section 4.1). Refer back to that
section for relevant information on the following tasks:
• Scheduling the biosurvey
• Obtaining a USGS topographical map
• Selecting and marking monitoring locations
• Becoming familiar with safety procedures
TASK 1 Gather tools and equipment for the Streamside Biosurvey
In addition to the basic equipment listed in Section 2.4, you should collect the following equipment needed for the
macroinvertebrate collection of the Streamside Biosurvey:
• Vial with tight cap filled about one-half full with 70 percent ethyl alcohol
• Buckets (2)
• Hand lens, magnifying glass, or field microscope
• Tweezers, eyedropper, or spoon
• Plastic bag
• Large, shallow, white pans, such as dishpans (2)
• Spray water bottle
• Plastic ice cube tray
• Taxonomic key to aquatic organisms
• Calculator
• For rocky-bottom streams—Kick net, a fine mesh (500 um) nylon net approximately 3x3 feet with a 3-foot long
supporting pole on each side is recommended—Figure 4.7).
• For muddy-bottom streams--D-frame net (a dip net with a frame 12 inches wide with a fine nylon mesh, usually about
500 um, attached to the frame).
Step 2 Collect and Sort Macroinvertebrates
The method you use to collect macroinvertebrates using this approach depends on the type of stream you are sampling.
Rocky-bottom streams are defined as those with bottoms made up of gravel, cobbles, and boulders in any combination and
usually have definite riffle areas. Riffle areas are fairly well oxygenated and, therefore, are prime habitats for benthic
macroinvertebrates. In these streams, use the rocky-bottom sampling method
Muddy-bottom streams have muddy, silty, or sandy bottoms and lack riffles. Generally, these are slow moving, low-gradient
streams (i.e., streams that flow along relatively flat terrain). In such streams, macroinvertebrates generally attach themselves to
overhanging plants, roots, logs, submerged vegetation, and stream substrate where organic particles are trapped. In these
streams, use the muddy-bottom sampling method.
Both methods are detailed below. Regardless of which collection method is used, the process for counting, identifying, and
analyzing the macroinvertebrate sample for the Streamside Biosurvey is the same.
Rockj'-Bottom Sampling Method
-------
Use the following method of macroinvertebrate sampling in streams that have riffles and gravel/cobble substrates. You will
collect three samples at each site and composite (combine) them to obtain one large total sample.
Sampling
TASK 1 Identify the sampling location
You should have already located your site on a map along with its latitude and longitude (see Task 3. in Section 4.1 - Stream
Habitat Walk).
1. You are going to sample in three different spots
within a 100-yard stream reach. These spots may be
three separate riffles; one large riffle with different
current velocities; or, if no riffles are present, three
run areas with gravel or cobble substrate.
Combinations are also possible (if, for example, your
site has only one small riffle and several run areas).
Mark off your 100-yard stream reach. If possible, it
should begin at least 50 yards upstream of any
human-made modification of the channel, such as a
bridge, dam, or pipeline crossing, Avoid walking in
the stream, since this might dislodge
macroinvertebrates and alter your sampling results.
2. Sketch the 100-yard sampling area. Indicate the
location of your three sampling spots on the sketch.
Mark the most downstream site as Site 1, the middle
site as Site 2, and the upstream site as Site 3. (See
Fig. 4.8.)
TASK 2 Get into place
1. Always approach your sampling locations from the
downstream end and sample the site farthest • ' ' ' •-..,.•
downstream first (Site 1) (see Fig. 4.9. Panel #1). ''
This minimizes the possibility of biasing your second
and third collections with dislodged sediment or
macroinvertebrates.
Always use a clean kick net, relatively free of mud
and debris from previous uses. Fill a bucket about
one third full with stream water and fill your spray
bottle.
2. Select a 3-foot by 3-foot riffle area for sampling at
Site 1. One member of the team, the net holder,
should position the net at the downstream end of this
sampling area. Hold the net handles at a 45 degree
angle to the water's surface (see Fig. 4.9. Panel #2).
Be sure that the bottom of the net fits tightly against
the stream-bed so no macroinvertebrates escape
under the net. You may use rocks from the sampling
area to anchor the net against the stream bottom.
Don't allow any water to flow over the net.
TASK 3 Dislodge the macroinvertebrates
1. Pick up any large rocks in the 3-foot by 3-foot sampling area and rub them thoroughly over the partially-filled bucket so
that any macroinvertebrates clinging to the rocks will be dislodged into the bucket (see Fig. 4.9. Panel #3). Then place
each cleaned rock outside of the sampling area. After sampling is completed, rocks can be returned to the stretch of
stream they came from.
2. The member of the team designated as the "kicker" should thoroughly stir up the sampling area with their feet, starting
at the upstream edge of the 3-foot by 3-foot sampling area and working downstream, moving toward the net. All
dislodged organisms will be carried by the stream flow into the net (see Fig. 4.9. Panel #4). Be sure to disturb the first
-------
few inches of stream sediment to dislodge burrowing organisms. As a guide, disturb the sampling area for about 3
minutes, or until the area is thoroughly worked over.
3. Any large rocks used to anchor the net should be thoroughly rubbed into the bucket as above.
TASK 4 Remove the net
1. Next, remove the net without allowing any of the organisms it contains to wash away. While the net holder grabs the top
of the net handles, the kicker grabs the bottom of the net handles and the net's bottom edge. Remove the net from the
stream with a forward scooping motion (see Fig. 4.9. Panel #5).
2. Roll the kick net into a cylinder shape and place it vertically in the partially filled bucket. Pour or spray water down the
net to flush its contents into the bucket (see Fig. 4.9, Panel #6). If necessary, pick debris and organisms from the net by
hand. Release back into the stream any fish, amphibians, or reptiles caught in the net.
TASK 5 Collect the second and third samples
Once you have removed all the organisms from the net repeat these tasks at Sites 2 and 3. Put the samples from all three sites
into the same bucket. Combining the debris and organisms from all three sites into the same bucket is called compositing.
Hint: If your bucket is nearly full of water after you have washed the net clean, let the debris and organisms settle to the
bottom of the bucket. Then cup the net over the bucket and pour the water through the net into a second bucket. Inspect the
water in the second bucket to be sure no organisms came through.
TASK 6 Sort macroinvertebrates
Pour the contents of the bucket into a large, shallow, white pan. Add some stream water to the pan, and fill the ice cube tray
with stream water. Using tweezers, eye dropper, or spoon, pick through the leaf litter and organic material looking for
anything that swims, crawls, or seems to be hiding in a shell, like a snail. Look carefully; many of these creatures are quite
small and fast-swimming. Sort similar organisms into the ice cube tray.
Note: Instructions for counting, identifying, and analyzing the macroinvertebrate sample follow the muddy-bottom sampling
method. (See Step 3)
Muddy-Bottom Sampling Method
Picking Bugs
Some monitoring programs find it easier to collect
organisms from the net by hand-picking them
rather than washing the sample into a pan and then
trying to pick through the floating debris. The
advantage to placing the organisms in a pan is that
they are more likely to survive while in the pan
and their characteristic movements will help in
organism identification.
If you prefer to pick bugs directly off the net, a
white background, such as a white plastic trash
bag under the net, will help you see the bugs more
clearly. In addition, periodically wetting the net
with a water bottle will help keep the bugs alive
and moving.
Identification can be made easier if you sort the
organisms into groups based on physical
similarities and place them together in sections of
an ice cube tray as you pick them from the pan or
net.
n muddy-bottom streams, as in rocky- bottom streams, the goal is to
>ample the most productive habitats available and look for the widest
variety of organisms. The most productive habitats are the ones that
larbor a diverse population of pollution sensitive-macroinvertebrates.
Volunteers should sample by using a D-frame net to jab at the habitat
md scoop up the organisms that are dislodged. The objective is to
collect a combined sample from 20 jabs taken from a variety of habitats.
TASK 1 Determine which habitats are present
Vluddy-bottom streams usually have four habitats (Fig. 4.10). It is
generally best to concentrate sampling efforts on the most productive
labitat available, yet to sample other principal habitats if they are
aresent. This ensures that you will secure as wide a variety of organisms
is possible. Not all habitats are present in all streams or present in
,ignificant amounts. If your sampling areas have not been preselected,
ry to determine which of the following habitats are present. (Avoid
landing in the stream while making your habitat determinations.)
• Vegetated bank margins. This habitat consists of overhanging
bank vegetation and submerged root mats attached to banks. The
bank margins may also contain submerged, decomposing leaf
packs trapped in root wads or lining the streambanks. This is
generally a highly productive habitat in a muddy_bottom stream,
and it is often the most abundant type of habitat.
• Snags and logs. This habitat consists of submerged wood,
-------
primarily dead trees, logs, branches, roots, cypress knees and leaf
packs lodged between rocks or logs. This is also a very productive
muddy-bottom stream habitat.
• Aquatic vegetation beds and decaying organic matter. This
habitat consists of beds of submerged, green/leafy plants that are
attached to the stream bottom. This habitat can be as productive as
vegetated bank margins, and snags and logs.
• Silt/sand/gravel substrate. This habitat includes sandy, silty, or
muddy stream bottoms; rocks along the stream bottom; and/or
wetted gravel bars. This habitat may also contains algae-covered
rocks (sometimes called Aufwuchs). This is the least productive
of the four muddy-bottom stream habitats, and it is always present
in one form or another (e.g., silt, sand, mud, or gravel might
predominate).
TASK 2 Determine how many times to jab in each habitat type
Your goal is to jab a total of 20 times. The D-frame net is 1 foot wide, and a jab should be approximately 1 foot in length.
Thus, 20 jabs equals 20 square feet of combined habitat.
• If all four habitats are present in plentiful amounts, j ab the vegetated banks 10 times and divide the remaining 10 j abs
among the remaining 3 habitats.
• If three habitats are present in plentiful amounts and one is absent, jab the silt/sand/gravel substrate the least productive
habitat 5 times and divide the remaining 15 jabs among the other two more productive habitats.
• If only two habitats are present in plentiful amounts, the silt/sand/gravel substrate will most likely be one of those
habitats. Jab the silt/sand/gravel substrate 5 times and the more productive habitat 15 times.
• If some habitats are plentiful and others are sparse, sample the sparse habitats to the extent possible, even if you can
take only one or two jabs. Take the remaining jabs from the plentiful habitat(s). This rule also applies if you cannot
reach a habitat because of unsafe stream conditions. Jab a total of 20 times.
Because you might need to make an educated guess to decide how many jabs to take in each habitat type, it is critical that you
note, on the field data sheet, how many jabs you took in each habitat. This information can be used to help characterize your
findings.
-------
TASK 3 Get into place
Outside and downstream of your first sampling location (1st habitat), rinse the dip net and check to make sure it does not
contain any macroinvertebrates or debris from the last time it was used. Fill a bucket approximately one-third full with clean
stream water. Also, fill the spray bottle with clean stream water. This bottle will be used to wash down the net between jabs
and after sampling is completed.
This method of sampling requires only one person to disturb the stream habitats. While one person is sampling, a second
person should stand outside the sampling area, holding the bucket and spray bottle. After every few jabs, the sampler should
hand the net to the second person, who then can rinse the contents of the net into the bucket.
TASK 4 Dislodge the macroinvertebrates
Approach the first sample site from downstream, and sample as you walk upstream. Here is how to sample in the four habitat
types:
• Sample vegetated bank margins by jabbing vigorously, with an upward motion, brushing the net against vegetation and
roots along the bank. The entire jab motion should occur underwater.
• To sample snags and logs, hold the net with
one hand under the section of submerged
wood you are sampling. With the other hand
(which should be gloved), rub about 1
square foot of area on the snag or log. Scoop
organisms, bark, twigs, or other organic
matter you dislodge into your net. Each
combination of log rubbing and net
scooping is one jab (Fig. 4.11).
• To sample aquatic vegetation beds, jab
vigorously, with an upward motion, against
or through the plant bed. The entire jab
motion should occur underwater.
• To sample a silt/sand/gravel substrate, place
the net with one edge against the stream
bottom and push it forward about a foot (in
an upstream direction) to dislodge the first
few inches of silt, sand, gravel, or rocks. To
avoid gathering a netful of mud, periodically
sweep the mesh bottom of the net back and
forth in the water, making sure that water , ' .«,,/,,;,;,,<, M/-C;,«//.WH.\ K. <>i>isr
does not run over the top of the net. This
will allow fine silt to rinse out of the net.
When you have completed all 20 jabs, rinse the net thoroughly into the bucket. If necessary, pick any clinging organisms from
the net by hand and put them in the bucket.
TASK 5 Sort the macroinvertebrates
Pour the contents of the bucket (water, organisms, and organic material) into a large, shallow, white pan and fill the ice cube
tray with clean stream water. Using tweezers, eye dropper, or spoon, pick through the leaf litter and organic material looking
for anything that swims, crawls, or seems to be hiding in a shell (like a snail). Look carefully; many of these creatures are
quite small and fast-swimming. Sort similar organisms into the plastic ice cube tray.
Step 3 Identify Macroinverte-brates and Calculate Stream Rating
The following methods are used for both the rocky- and muddy-bottom assessments.
Task 1 Identify Macroinvertebrates
1. Identify the collected macroinvertebrates. Using the hand lens or magnifying glass and the aquatic organism
identification key, carefully observe the collected macroinvertebrates. Refine your initial sort so that like individuals are
placed in the same section(s) of the ice cube tray. If you cannot identify an organism, place one or two specimens in the
alcohol-filled vial and forward it to your program coordinator for identification.
-------
2. On your field data sheet, note the number of individuals of each type of organism you have identified (Section 3 of the
field data sheet See Fig. 4.12.).
Note: When you feel that you have identified all the organisms to the best of your ability, return the macroinvertebrates
to the stream.
3. Assign one of the following abundance codes to each type of organism. Record the code next to the actual count on the
field data sheet.
R (rare) = if 1-9 organisms are found in the sample
C (common) = if 10-99 organisms are found in the sample
D (dominant) = if 100 or more organisms are found in the sample
Your field data sheet should be organized to help you sort macroinvertebrates into three groups based on their ability to
tolerate pollution. A local authority (such as a state biologist or entomologist) should determine which organisms belong
in each pollution tolerance category for your region.
Generally, the three tolerance groups are as follows:
• Group I (sensitive organisms) includes pollution- sensitive organisms such as mayflies, stoneflies, and non net-spinning
caddisflies, which are typically found in good-quality water.
• Group II (somewhat sensitive organisms) includes somewhat pollution-tolerant organisms such as net-spinning
caddisflies, crayfish, sowbugs, and clams, found in fair-quality water.
• Group III (tolerant organisms) includes pollution-tolerant organisms such as worms, leeches, and midges, found in
poor-quality water.
TASK 2 Calculate the stream quality rating
The stream water quality rating takes into account the pollution sensitivity of the organisms and their relative abundance. This
is accomplished through use of a weighting system.
The weighting system acknowledges the most desirable combinations of pollution sensitivity and abundance by assigning
these extra weights within a 5, 3, and 1 point scale. Pollution-sensitive organisms receive a weighting factor based on a 5-point
scale. Somewhat sensitive organisms are weighted on a 3-point scale, and tolerant organisms are weighted on a 1-point scale.
As can be seen in Table 4.2, a sample's ideal combination of organisms would be "sensitive" and "somewhat sensitive"
organisms in common abundance (10-99 organisms), and pollution "tolerant" organisms in rare abundance (less than 10
organisms). This is because it is never ideal for any given type of organism to dominate a sample, and because it is best to
have a wide variety of organisms including a few pollution-tolerant individuals.
1. Add the number of R's, C's and D's in each of the 3 pollution tolerance groupings. Then, for each grouping, multiply the
total number of R's, C's and D's by the relevant weighting factor. Table 4.3 illustrates sample calculations for
determining the water quality rating for (hypothetical) Volunteer Creek.
Note: The tolerance category groupings shown on the Biosurvey Data Sheet were developed for streams in the
mid-Atlantic (Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, District of Columbia, Pennsylvania). These groupings may not totally
apply in other regions of the United States. It is important that a local aquatic biologist take a look at these
categories and make any changes necessary for your region.
In addition, depending on the level of taxonomic training volunteers receive, you might consider separating out some
other families of organisms. For instance, the tolerance groupings given here separate caddisflies into net-spinning and
non net-spinning families. Mayflies might also be separated into different tolerance groupings. It is not recommended
here, however, because of the difficulty in distinguishing mayfly families in the field without a microscope.
Some volunteer programs, like the one coordinated by the Audubon Naturalist Society in Maryland, conduct intensive
field identification training workshops and teach volunteers to distinguish several families in the field. Creating more
specific tolerance groupings may be an option for your program if you have the resources and expertise to conduct more
intensive taxonomic field training.
To obtain a water quality rating for the site, total the values for each group and add them together. The total score for
the sample stream site is: 16.2 (Group I) + 19.0 (Group II) + 2.3 (Group III) = 37.5.
The final step is to compare the score to water quality ratings (good to poor) established by a trained biologist familiar
with local stream fauna. Table 4.4 presents a tentative rating scale for streams in Maryland. Assuming Volunteer Creek
is located in Maryland, the stream would receive a rating of "Fair."
-------
Note: In addition to adjusting the rating scale according to regional location, it might also need to be adjusted for
muddy-bottom vs. rocky-bottom streams. An experienced stream biologist can calculate the best rating system for your
area's streams by examining data from several streams.
Abundance! Weighting Factoi
|Rare (R)
Common
(C)
Dominant
(D)
Group I
Sensitive
5.0
5.6
5.3
Group II
Somewhat
Sensitive
Group
III
Tolerant
3.2
12
3.4
3.0
1.1
1.0
Group I
Sensitive
Group II
Somewhat
Sensitive
Tolerant
1 (No. of R's)
x5.0 = 5.0
2 (No. ofC's)
x5.6 = 11.2
Index Value
for Group I =
16.2
3 (No. of R's) x
3.2 = 9.6
l(No. ofC's)x
3.4 = 3.4
2 (No. ofD's)x
3.0 = 6.0
Index Value for
Group II = 19.20
1 (No. of R's)
x 1.2 =1.2
l(NoofC's)
x 1.1 = 1.1
Index Value
for Group III
= 2.3
Score Rating
>40
20-40
<20
Good
Fair
Poor
In a healthy stream, the sensitive (Group I) organisms will be well represented in a sample. It is important to remember
that macroinvertebrate populations can fluctuate seasonally and that these natural fluctuations can affect your results.
Therefore, it is best to compare the results by season from year to year. (Compare your spring sampling results to each
other, not to fall results.)
Step 4 Conduct the Streamside Biosurvey: Habitat Walk
You will conduct a habitat assessment (which will include measuring general characteristics and local land use) in a
100-yard section of stream that includes the riffles from which organisms were collected.
TASK 1 Delineate the habitat assessment boundaries
1. Begin by identifying the most downstream riffle that was sampled for macroinvertebrates. Using your tape
measure or twine, mark off a 100-yard section extending 25 yards below the downstream riffle and about 75
yards upstream.
2. Complete the identifying information on your field data sheet for your habitat assessment site. On your stream
sketch, be as detailed as possible, and be sure to note which riffles were sampled.
TASK 2 Complete the Physical Characteristics, Local Watershed
Characteristics, and Visual Biological Survey sections of the field sheet
For safety reasons as well as to protect the stream habitat, it is best to estimate these characteristics rather than actually
wading into the stream to measure them.
-------
In-stream Characteristics
1.
Pools,
riffles,
and
runs
create
a
mixture
of
flows
and
depths
and
provide
a
variety
of
habitats
to
support
fish
and
invertebrate
life.
Pools
are
deep
-------
with
slow
water.
Riffles
are
shallow
with
fast,
turbulent
water
running
over
rocks.
Runs
are
deep
with
fast
water
and
little
or
no
turbulence.
2. Stream bottom (substrate) is the material on the stream bottom. Identify what substrate types are present.
Substrate types include:
• Silt/clay/mud—This substrate has a sticky, cohesive feeling. The particles are fine. The spaces between the
particles hold a lot of water, making the sediments behave like ooze.
• Sand (up to 0.1 inch)—A sandy bottom is made up of tiny, gritty particles of rock that are smaller than
gravel but coarser than silt (gritty, up to pea size).
• Gravel (0.1-2 inches)—K gravel bottom is made up of stones ranging from tiny quarter-inch pebbles to
rocks of about 2 inches (fine gravel - pea size to marble size; coarse gravel - marble to tennis ball size).
• Cobbles (2-10 inches)—Most rocks on this type of stream bottom are between 2 and 10 inches (between a
tennis ball and a basketball).
• Boulders (greater than 10 inches)—Most of the rocks on the bottom are greater than 10 inches (between a
basketball and a car in size).
• Bedrock—is solid rock (or rocks bigger than a car).
Estimate the percentage of substrate types at your site.
3. Embeddedness is the extent to which rocks (gravel,
cobbles, and boulders) are sunken into the silt, sand, or
mud of the stream bottom (Fig. 4.14). Generally, the more
rocks are embedded, the less rock surface or space
between rocks is available as habitat for aquatic
macroinvertebrates and for fish spawning. Excessive silty
runoff from erosion can increase the embeddedness in a
stream. To estimate the embeddedness, observe the
amount of silt or finer sediments overlying, in between,
and surrounding the rocks.
4. Streambed stability can provide additional clues to the
amount of siltation in a stream. When you walk in the
stream, note whether your feet sink significantly into sand
or mud.
5. Presence of logs or woody debris (not twigs and leaves) in
stream can slow or divert water to provide important fish
habitat such as pools and hiding places. Mark the box that
describes the general amount of woody debris in the
stream.
-------
6. Naturally occurring organic material in stream. This
material includes leaves and twigs. Mark the box that
describes the general amount of organic matter in the
stream.
7. Water appearance can be a physical indicator of water
pollution.
• Clear - colorless, transparent
• Milky - cloudy-white or grey, not transparent; might
be natural or due to pollution
• Foamy - might be natural or due to pollution,
generally detergents or nutrients (foam that is
several inches high and does not brush apart easily
is generally due to some sort of pollution)
• Turbid - cloudy brown due to suspended silt or
organic material
• Dark brown - might indicate that acids are being
released into the stream due to decaying plants
• Oily sheen - multicolored reflection might indicate
oil floating in the stream, although some sheens are
natural
• Orange - might indicate acid drainage
• Green - might indicate excess nutrients being
released into the stream
8. Water odor can be a physical indicator of water pollution
• No smell or a natural odor
• Sewage - might indicate the release of human waste
material
• Chlorine - might indicate over-chlorinated sewage
treatment/water treatment plant or swimming pool
discharges
• Fishy - might indicate the presence of excessive
algal growth or dead fish
• Rotten eggs - might indicate sewage pollution (the ' ' • -, • ' - • •.
presence of methane from anaerobic conditions)
9. Water temperature can be particularly important for : • , .
determining the suitability of the stream as aquatic habitat
for some species offish and macroinvertebrates that have
distinct temperature requirements. Temperature also has a
direct effect on the amount of dissolved oxygen available
to the aquatic organisms. Measure temperature by
submerging a thermometer for at least 2 minutes in a
typical stream run. Repeat once and average the results.
Stream Bank and Channel Characteristics
10. Depth of runs andpools should be determined by estimating the vertical distance from the surface to the stream
bottom at a representative depth at each of the two habitats.
11. The width of the stream channel can be determined by estimating the width of the streambed that is covered by
water from bank to bank. If it varies widely, estimate an average width.
12. Stream velocity can have a direct influence on the health, variety, and abundance of aquatic communities. If water
flows too quickly, insects might be unable to maintain their hold on rocks and vegetation and be washed
downstream; if water flows too slowly, it might provide insufficient aeration for species needing high levels of
dissolved oxygen. Stream velocity can be affected by dams, channelization, terrain, runoff, and other factors. To
measure stream velocity, mark off a 20-foot section of stream run and measure the time it takes a stick, leaf, or
other floating biodegradable object to float the 20 feet. Repeat 5 times and pick the average time. Divide the
distance (20 feet) by the average time (seconds) to determine the velocity in feet per second. (See Chapter 5,
'/>•-'• ^^°': ' -fff :
:jf ' 3$-^ '^ ^
-------
^iS^'-v..'.
Giadually sloping
' V
.>«*
Section 1 on flow for a more in-depth discussion on using floats to estimate velocity.)
13. The shape of the stream bank, the extent of artificial modifications, and the shape of the stream channel are
determined by standing at the downstream end of the 25-yard section and looking upstream.
a. The shape of the stream bank (Fig. 4.15) may include.
• Vertical or undercut bank - a bank that rises
vertically or overhangs the stream. This type of
bank generally provides good cover for
macroinvertebrates and fish and is resistant to
erosion. However, if seriously undercut, it might
be vulnerable to collapse.
• Steeply sloping - a bank that slopes at more than
a 30 degree angle. This type of bank is very
vulnerable to erosion.
• Gradual sloping - a bank that has a slope of 30
degrees or less. Although this type of stream
bank is highly resistant to erosion, it does not
provide much streamside cover.
b. Artificial bank modifications include all structural
changes to the stream bank such as riprap (broken rock,
cobbles, or boulders placed on earth surfaces such as
the face of a dam or the bank of a stream, for protection
against the action of the water) and bulkheads.
Determine the approximate percentage of each bank
(both the left and right) that is artificially covered by
the placement of rocks, wood, or concrete.
c. The shape of the stream channel can be described as
narrow (less than 6 feet wide from bank to bank), wide
(more than 6 feet from bank to bank), shallow (less than
3 feet deep from the stream substrate to the top of the
banks) or deep (more than 3 feet from the stream
substrate to the top of the banks). Choose the category
that best describes the channel.
• Narrow, deep
• Narrow, shallow
• Wide, deep
• Wide, shallow
14. Streamside cover information helps determine the quality and extent of the stream's riparian zone. This
information is important at the stream bank itself and for a distance away from the stream bank. For example,
trees, bushes, and tall grass can contribute shade and cover for fish and wildlife and can provide the stream with
needed organic material such as leaves and twigs. Lawns indicate that the stream's riparian zone has been altered,
that pesticides and grass clippings are a possible problem, and that little habitat and shading are available. Bare
soil and pavement might indicate problems with erosion and runoff. Looking upstream, provide an estimate of the
percentage of the stream bank (left and right stream banks) covered by the following:
• Trees
• Bushes, shrubs - conifers or deciduous bushes less than 15 feet high
• Tall grass, ferns, etc. - includes tall natural grasses, ferns, vines, and mosses
• Lawn - cultivated and maintained short grass
• Boulders - rocks larger than 10 inches
• Gravel/cobbles/sand - rocks smaller than 10 inches; sand
• Bare soil
• Pavement, structure - any man-made structures or paved areas, including paths, roads, bridges, houses, etc.
15. Stream shading is a measurement of the extent to which the stream itself is overhung and shaded by the cover
identified in 14 above. This shade (or overhead canopy) provides several important functions in the stream
habitat. It cools the water; offers habitat, protection, and refuge for aquatic organisms; and provides a direct
source of beneficial organic matter and insects to the stream. Determine the extent that vegetation shades the
-------
stream at the site.
16. General conditions of the stream bank and stream channel, and other conditions that might be affecting the
stream are determined by standing at the downstream end of the 25-yard site and looking upstream. Provide
observations for the right and left banks of the stream.
a. Stream bank conditions that might be affecting the stream.
• Natural plant cover degraded—note whether streamside vegetation is trampled or missing or has been
replaced by landscaping, cultivation, or pavement. (These conditions could lead to erosion.)
• Banks collapsed/eroded—note whether banks or parts of banks have been washed away or worn down.
(These conditions could limit habitats in the area.)
• Garbage/junk adjacent to the stream—note the presence of litter, tires, appliances, car bodies, shopping
carts, and garbage dumps.
• Foam or sheen on bank-note whether there is foam or an oily sheen on the stream bank. Sheen may
indicate an oil spill or leak, and foam may indicate the presence of detergent.
b. Stream channel conditions that might be affecting the stream.
• Mud/silt/sand on bottom/entering stream—can interfere with the ability offish to sight potential prey. It can
clog fish gills and smother fish eggs in spawning areas in the stream bottom. It can be an indication of poor
construction practices, urban area runoff, silviculture (forestry-related activities), or agriculture in the
watershed. It can also be a normal condition, especially in a slow-moving, muddy-bottom stream.
• Garbage or junk in stream—note the presence of litter, tires, appliances, car bodies, shopping carts, and
garbage.
c. Other general conditions that might be affecting the stream.
• Yard waste (e.g., grass clippings)~is there evidence that grass clippings, cut branches, and other types of
yard waste have been dumped into the stream?
• Livestock in or with unrestricted access to stream—are livestock present, or is there an obvious path that
livestock use to get to the water from adjacent fields? Is there streamside degradation caused by livestock?
• Actively discharging pipes are there pipes—with visible openings discharging fluids or water into the
stream? Note such pipes even though you may not be able to tell where they come from or what they are
discharging.
• Other pipes—we there pipes near or entering the stream? Note such pipes even if you cannot find an
opening or see matter being discharged.
• Ditches-are there ditches, draining the surrounding land and leading into the stream?
Local watershed characteristics
17. Adjacent land uses can potentially have a great impact on the quality and state of the stream and riparian areas.
Determine the land uses, based on your own judgment of the activities in the watershed surrounding your site
within a quarter of a mile. Enter a " 1" if a land use is present and a "2" if it is clearly having a negative impact on
the stream.
Visual biological survey
18. Are fish present in the stream? Fish can indicate that the stream is of sufficient quality for other organisms.
19. Barriers to the movement offish in the stream are obstructions that would keep fish from moving freely upstream
or downstream.
20. Aquatic plants provide food and cover for aquatic organisms. Plants also might provide very general indications
of stream quality. For example, streams that are overgrown with plants could be over enriched by nutrients.
Streams devoid of plants could be affected by extreme acidity or toxic pollutants. Aquatic plants may also be an
indicator of stream velocity because plants cannot take root in fast-flowing streams.
21. Algae are simple plants that do not grow true roots, stems, or leaves and that mainly live in water, providing food
for the food chain. Algae may grow on rocks, twigs, or other submerged materials, or float on the surface of the
water. It naturally occurs in green and brown colors. Excessive algal growth may indicate excessive nutrients
(organic matter or a pollutant such as fertilizer) in the stream.
-------
Step 4 Complete all the field data sheets
After you have completed macroinvertebrate sampling, analysis of findings, and the habitat characterization, make sure
you have completed the field data sheet to the extent possible and that the recorded data are legible. If you are not able
to determine how to answer a question on the field data sheet, just leave the space blank. Return all completed forms to
your program coordinator.
Streamside Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrates (PDF, 28.7 KB)
Streamside Biosurvey: Habitat Walk (PDF, 22.3 KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader is available as a free
download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands. Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
jfi CDtfV yn|t*d S[a1*5
\y LI /\ Envlf Pfaiftei&n
Office of Water
4.3
Intensive Stream Biosurvey
Selecting Metrics to Determine Stream Health
The Intensive Stream Biosurvey is based on the habitat assessment and macroinvertebrate
sampling approach developed by EPA in its Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Streams
and Rivers (Protocol II) and adapted by volunteer monitoring programs such as Maryl
and Save Our Streams and River Watch Network.
Like the Stream Habitat Walk and Streamside Biosurvey, this approach includes a study
of macroinvertebrates and habitat. However, the Intensive Stream Biosurvey approach is
more rigorous; it requires substantial volunteer training in habitat and macroinve rtebrate
sampling methods and in macroinvertebrate identification. This approach also requires
the involvement of a stream biologist to advise the program participants regarding
everything from the selection of reference conditions to taxonomy and data an alysis.
Because of the need for training and professional assistance, the Intensive Stream
Biosurvey approach can be expensive and labor-intensive for the volunteer program. Its
benefits, however, are equally clear: with proper quality control and volunteer train ing,
the Intensive Stream Biosurvey can yield credible information on subtle stream impacts
and water quality trends. Key features of the Intensive Stream Biosurvey are as follows:
• It relies on comparing the results for the sampling site to regional or local
reference conditions. This type of study is used to determine how streams in a
given area compare to the best possible conditions. The reference condition is a co
mposite of the best attainable (minimally impaired) stream conditions within the
region and should be determined by an experienced aquatic biologist familiar with
the characteristics of the ecological region.
• It includes a detailed habitat assessment that requires the volunteer to rate 10
parameters on a scale ofO to 20. The results of the habitat assessment are
compared to the score received by the stream's reference condition, and a percent s
imilarity score is calculated.
• The methods for collecting macroinvertebrates are similar to those of the
Streamside Biosurvey. However, rather than being processed streamside, the entire
-------
sample of macroinvertebrates is preserved and returned to a laboratory. A portion,
o r subsample, of the total organisms collected at each location is randomly
selected and identified to taxonomic family level in the lab. After identification, a
series of indices (or metrics) are calculated to provide a broad range of information
about th e stream site. The subsample and the rest of the collected organisms are
maintained as a voucher collection, which serves as a quality assurance
component.
• The Intensive Stream Biosurvey requires that volunteers be extensively trained
before habitat assessment and macroinvertebrate sampling and before attempting
macroinvertebrate identification in the laboratory. An experienced aquatic biologi
st is needed to determine and evaluate the regional reference conditions; train
volunteers in habitat characteristics; and supervise and train volunteers in the
collection, processing, and identification of sample macroinvertebrates. A
laboratory (with mi croscopes) and a macroinvertebrate sample storage facility are
required.
Step 1 Prepare for the Intensive Stream Biosurvey field
work
Preparing for the Intensive Stream Biosurvey might take several months from the initial
planning stages to the time when actual sampling occurs. An aquatic biologist should be
centrally involved in all aspects of technical program development.
Issues that should be considered in planning the program include the following:
• Availability of reference conditions for your area
• Appropriate dates to sample in each season
• Appropriate sampling gear
• Sampling station location
• Availability of laboratory facilities and trainers
• Sample storage
• Data management
• Appropriate taxonomic keys, metrics, or measurements for macroinvertebrate
analysis
• Habitat assessment consistency
Some of the preparation work for this approach is similar to that of the Stream Habitat
Walk (section 4.1) and Streamside Biosurvey (section 4.2). Refer back to those sections
for relevant information on the following tasks:
• Obtaining a USGS topographical map
• Becoming familiar with safety procedures
-------
TASK 1 Select monitoring locations
If possible, the program coordinator, in conjunction with technical advisor(s), should
preselect sampling locations for each stream. This adds an element of quality control to
the sampling process. You might want to consider sampling at a few locations th at are
also sampled by state or local professionals, as a way to compare your results to theirs. Be
sure to secure approval to do so, however, and coordinate your sampling so as not to
affect professional results.
Provide detailed hand-drawn maps of the locations selected to the monitors. Know the
latitude and longitude of your monitoring locations. This is critical for mapping and for
many data management programs. Latitude and longitude can be calculated manually
(see Appendix C) or by using a hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS).
TASK 2 Schedule the field portion of the biosurvey
Schedule your Intensive Stream Biosurvey for a time of year for which reference
conditions have been established. Reference conditions might vary by season. It is also
essential that seasonal data be collected within the same index period, or window of ti
me, each year. In other words, if you sample during the last two weeks of March this
year, do the same next year.
Another factor to keep in mind is weather. It is best to wait at least a week after a heavy
rain or snow event before sampling. Heavy rains can have a scouring effect on
macroinvertebrates, washing them downstream. If this happens, samples collected will
not accurately reflect biological conditions. However, if you are studying the possible
impact of runoff from a particular source (such as a construction site), you might decide
to sample within a short time after heavy precipitation.
TASK 3 Gather tools and equipment for the Intensive
Stream Biosurvey
In addition to the basic sampling equipment listed for the Stream Habitat Walk, collect
the following equipment needed for the macroinvertebrate collection and habitat
assessment of the Intensive Stream Biosurvey:
• Jars (2, at least quart size), plastic, wide-mouth with tight cap; one should be empty
and the other filled about two thirds full with 70 percent ethyl alcohol. (Jars can be
purchased from a scientific supply company or you might try using large pick le,
mayonnaise, or quart mason jars.)
• Hand lens, magnifying glass, or field microscope
• Fine-point forceps
• Heavy-duty rubber gloves (kitchen gloves will work fine)
• Plastic sugar scooper or ice-cream scooper
-------
• Kick net (rocky bottom
stream) or dip net (muddy
bottom stream) (see Fig. 4.7,
in Section 4.2 - Streamside
Biosurvey)
• Buckets (2)
• String or twine (50 yards);
tape measure
• Stakes (4)
• Orange (a stick, an apple, or
a fish float may also be used
in place of an orange) to
measure velocity
• Reference maps indicating
general information pertinent
to the sampling area,
including the surrounding
roadways, as well as
hand-drawn station map
• Station ID tags
• Spray water bottle
• Pencils (at least 2)
TASK 4 Become
familiar with field data
sheets and instructions/definitions for conducting the
macroinvertebrate collection and Habitat Assessment
portions of the Intensive Biosurvey
Step 2 Conduct the Intensive Biosurvey field work
The method you use to collect macroinvertebrates using this approach depends on the
type of stream you are sampling.
Rocky-bottom streams are defined as those with bottoms made up of gravel, cobbles, and
boulders in any combination. They usually have definite riffle areas. Riffle areas are
fairly well oxygenated and, therefore, are prime habitats for benthic macroinvert ebrates.
In these streams, use the Rocky-Bottom sampling method.
Muddy-bottom streams have muddy, silty, or sandy bottoms that lack riffles. Usually,
these are slow-moving, low-gradient streams (i.e., streams that flow along flat terrain). In
such streams, macroinvertebrates generally attach to overhanging plants, root s, logs,
Sieve Buckets
Most
professional
biological
monitoring
programs
employ sieve
buckets as a
holding
container for
composited
samples. These
buckets have a
mesh bottom
that allows
water to drain
out while the organisms and debris remain. This
material can then be easily transferred to the
alcohol-filled jars. However, sieve buckets can be
expensive. Many volunteer programs employ
alternative equipment, such as the two regular
buckets described in this section. Regardless of the
equipment, the process for compositing and
transferring the sample is basically the same. The
decision is one of cost and convenience.
-------
submerged vegetation, and stream substrate where organic particles are trapped. In these
streams, use the Muddy Bottom sampling method.
Each method is detailed below. Regardless of which collection method is used, the
process for counting, identifying, and analyzing the macroinvertebrate sample for the
Intensive Stream Biosurvey is the same. Following the discussion of both approaches to
macroinvertebrate collection and habitat assessment procedures is a section on analyzing
the sample.
Rocky-Bottom Streams
Parti: Macroinvertebrate Sampling Method
Use the following method of macroinvertebrate sampling in streams that have riffles and
gravel/cobble substrates. You will collect three samples at each site and composite them
to obtain one large total sample.
TASK 1 Identify the sampling location
You should already have located your site on a map along with its latitude and longitude
(see Task3, Step 2 in Section 4.1 - Stream Habitat Walk)
1. You are going to sample in three different spots within a 100-yard stream site.
These spots may be three separate riffles; one large riffle with different current
velocities; or, if no riffles are present, three run areas with gravel or cobble sub
strate. Combinations are also possible (if, for example, your site has only one small
riffle and several run areas).
Mark off your 100-yard stream site. If possible, it should begin at least 50 yards
upstream of any human-made modification of the channel, such as a bridge, dam,
or pipeline crossing, Avoid walking in the stream, since this might dislodge
macroinvertebrat es and alter your sampling results.
2. Sketch the 100-yard sampling area. Indicate the location of your three sampling
spots on the sketch. Mark the most downstream site as Site 1, the middle site as
Site 2, and the upstream site as Site 3. (See Fig. 4.8.)
TASK 2 Get into place
(See Figure 4.9: Procedures for collecting a macroinvertebrate sample in a rocky-bottom
stream)
1. Always approach your sampling locations from the downstream end and
sample the site farthest downstream first (Site 1). This keeps you from biasing
your second and third collections with dislodged sediment or macroinvertebrates.
Always use a clean kick-seine, relatively free of mud and debris from previous
uses. Fill a bucket about one-third full with stream water and fill your spray bottle.
2. Select a 3-foot by 3-foot riffle area for sampling at Site 1. One member of the
team, the net holder, should position the net at the downstream end of this
-------
sampling area. Hold the net handles at a 45 degree angle to the water's surface. Be
sure th at the bottom of the net fits tightly against the streambed so no
macroinvertebrates escape under the net. You may use rocks from the sampling
area to anchor the net against the stream bottom. Don't allow any water to flow
over the net.
TASK 3 Dislodge the macroinvertebrates
1. Pick up any large rocks in the 3-foot by 3-foot sampling area and rub them
thoroughly over the partially-filled bucket so that any macroinvertebrates clinging
to the rocks will be dislodged into the bucket. Then place each cleaned rock
outside of the sampling area. After sampling is completed, rocks can be returned to
the stretch of stream they came from.
2. The member of the team designated as the "kicker" should thoroughly stir up the
sampling area with their feet, starting at the upstream edge of the 3-foot by 3-foot
sampling area and working downstream, moving toward the net. All dislodged
organis ms will be carried by the stream flow into the net. Be sure to disturb the
first few inches of stream sediment to dislodge burrowing organisms. As a guide,
disturb the sampling area for about 3 minutes, or until the area is thoroughly
worked over.
3. Any large rocks used to anchor the net should be thoroughly rubbed into the bucket
as above.
TASK 4 Remove the net
1. Next, remove the net without allowing any of the organisms it contains to wash
away. While the net holder grabs the top of the net handles, the kicker grabs the
bottom of the net handles and the net's bottom edge. Remove the net from the
stream wi th a forward scooping motion.
2. Roll the kick net into a cylinder shape and place it vertically in the partially filled
bucket. Pour or spray water down the net to flush its contents into the bucket. If
necessary, pick debris and organisms from the net by hand. Release back into the
stream any fish, amphibians, or reptiles caught in the net.
TASK 5 Collect the second and third samples
Once you have removed all the organisms from the net, repeat these steps at Sites 2 and
3. Put the samples from all three sites into the same bucket. Combining the debris and
organisms from all three sites into the same bucket is called compositing.
Hint: If your bucket is nearly full of water after you have washed the net clean, let the
debris and organisms settle to the bottom of the bucket. Then cup the net over the bucket
and pour the water through the net into a second bucke t. Inspect the water in the second
bucket to be sure no organisms came through.
-------
TASK 6 Preserve the sample
After collecting and compositing all three samples, it is time to preserve the
sample. All team members should leave the stream and return to a relatively flat
section of stream bank with all their equipment. The next step will be to remove
large pieces of debris (leaves, twigs, and rocks) from the sample. Carefully remove
the debris one piece at a time. While holding the material over the bucket, use the
forceps, spray bottle, and your hands to pick, rub, and rinse the leaves, twigs, and
rocks to remove any attached organisms. Use your magnifying lens and forceps to
find and remove small organisms clinging to the debris. When you are satisfied
that the material is clean, discard it back into the stream.
You will need to drain off the water before transferring material to the jar. This
process will require two team members. Place the kick net over the second bucket,
which has not yet been used and should be completely empty. One team member
should push the center of the net into bucket #2, creating a small indentation or
depression. Then, hold the sides of the net closely over the mouth of the bucket.
The second person can now carefully pour the remaining contents of bucket #1
onto a small area of the net to drain the water and concentrate the organisms. Use
care when pouring so that organisms are not lost over the side of the net (Fig.
4.16).
Use your spray bottle,
forceps, sugar scoop, and
gloved hands to remove
all the material from
bucket #1 onto the net.
When you are satisfied
that bucket #1 is empty,
use your hands and the
sugar scoop to transfer all
the material from the net
into the empty jar.
Bucket #2 captured the
water and any organisms
that might have fallen
through the netting during
pouring. As a final check,
repeat the process above,
but this time, pour bucket
#2 over the net, into
bucket #1. Transfer any
organisms on the net into
the jar.
-------
3. Now, fill the jar (so that ;
all material is submerged)
with the alcohol from the
second jar. Put the lid
tightly back onto the jar
and gently turn the jar
upside down two or three
times to distribute the
alcohol and remove air
bubbles.
4. Complete the Sampling Station ID tag. Be sure to use a pencil, not a pen, because
the ink will run in the alcohol! The tag includes your station number, the stream,
location (e.g., upstream from a road crossing), date, time, and the names of the m
embers of the collecting crew. Place the ID tag into the sample container writing
side facing out, so that identification can be seen clearly.
Rocky-Bottom Streams
Part 2: Habitat Assessment Method
You will conduct a habitat assessment (which will include measuring general
characteristics and local land use) in a 100-yard section of stream that includes the riffles
from which organisms were collected.
TASK 1 Delineate the habitat assessment boundaries
1. Begin by identifying the most downstream riffle that was sampled for
macroinvertebrates. Using your tape measure or twine, mark off a 100-yard section
extending 25 yards below the downstream riffle and about 75 yards upstream.
2. Complete the identifying information on your field data sheet for your habitat
assessment site. On your stream sketch, be as detailed as possible, and be sure to
note which riffles were sampled.
TASK 2 Complete the General Characteristics and Local
Land Use sections of the field sheet
For safety reasons as well as to protect the stream habitat, it is best to estimate these
characteristics rather than actually wading into the stream to measure them.
General Characteristics
1. Water appearance can be a physical indicator of water pollution.
o Clear - colorless, transparent
o Milky - cloudy-white or grey, not transparent; might be natural or due to
pollution
o Foamy - might be natural or due to pollution, generally detergents or
-------
nutrients (foam that is several inches high and does not brush apart easily is
generally due to pollution)
o Turbid - cloudy brown due to suspended silt or organic material
o Dark brown - might indicate that acids are being released into the stream due
to decaying plants
o Oily sheen -multicolored reflection might indicate oil floating in the stream,
although some sheens are natural
o Orange - might indicate acid drainage
o Green - might indicate excess nutrients being released into the stream
2. Water odor can be a physical indicator of water pollution.
o None or natural smell
o Sewage - might indicate the release of human waste material
o Chlorine - might indicate that a sewage treatment plant is over-chlorinating
its effluent
o Fishy - might indicate the presence of excessive algal growth or dead fish
o Rotten eggs - might indicate sewage pollution (the presence of a natural gas)
3. Water temperature can be particularly important for determining whether the
stream is suitable as habitat for some species of fish and macroinvertebrates that
have distinct temperature requirements. Temperature also has a direct effect on t he
amount of dissolved oxygen available to aquatic organisms. Measure temperature
by submerging a thermometer for at least 2 minutes in a typical stream run. Repeat
once and average the results.
4. The width of the stream channel can be determined by estimating the width of the
streambed that is covered by water from bank to bank. If it varies widely along the
stream, estimate an average width.
Local Land Use
5. Local land use refers to the part of the watershed within 1/4 mile up-stream of and
adjacent to the site. Note which land uses are present, as well as which ones seem
to be having a negative impact on the stream. Base your observations on what you
can see, what you passed on the way to the stream, and, if possible, what you
notice as you leave the stream.
TASK 3 Conduct the habitat assessment
The following information describes the parameters you will evaluate for rocky-bottom
habitats. Use these definitions when completing the habitat assessment field data sheet.
The first two parameters should be assessed directly at the riffle(s) or run(s) that were
used for the macroinvertebrate sampling.
1. Attachment sites for macroinvertebrates are essentially the amount of living space
or hard substrates (rocks, snags) available for aquatic insects and snails. Many
-------
insects begin their life underwater in streams and need to attach themselves to
rocks, logs, branches, or other submerged substrates. The greater the variety and
number of available living spaces or attachment sites, the greater the variety of
insects in the stream. Optimally, cobble should predominate and boulders and
gravel sho uld be common. The availability of suitable living spaces for
macroinvertebrates decreases as cobble becomes less abundant and boulders,
gravel, or bedrock become more prevalent.
2. Embeddedness refers to the extent to which rocks (gravel, cobble, and boulders)
are surrounded by, covered, or sunken into the silt, sand, or mud of the stream
bottom. Generally, as rocks become embedded, fewer living spaces are available t
o macroinvertebrates and fish for shelter, spawning and egg incubation.
To estimate the percent of embeddedness, observe the amount of silt or finer
sediments overlying and surrounding the rocks. If kicking does not dislodge the
rocks or cobbles, they might be greatly embedded.
The following eight parameters should be assessed in the entire 100-yard section of the
stream.
3. Shelter for fish includes the relative quantity and variety of natural structures in the
stream, such as fallen trees, logs, and branches; cobble and large rocks; and
undercut banks that are available to fish for hiding, sleeping, or feedin g. A wide
variety of submerged structures in the stream provide fish with many living spaces;
the more living spaces in a stream, the more types offish the stream can support.
4. Channel alteration is basically a measure of large-scale changes in the shape of the
stream channel. Many streams in urban and agricultural areas have been
straightened, deepened (e.g., dredged), or diverted into concrete channels, often fo
r flood control purposes. Such streams have far fewer natural habitats for fish,
macroinvertebrates, and plants than do naturally meandering streams. Channel
alteration is present when the stream runs through a concrete channel; when
artificial embankment s, riprap, and other forms of artificial bank stabilization or
structures are present; when the stream is very straight for significant distances;
when dams, bridges, and flow-altering structures such as combined sewer overflow
(CSO) pipes are present; wh en the stream is of uniform depth due to dredging; and
when other such changes have occurred. Signs that indicate the occurrence of
dredging include straightened, deepened, and otherwise uniform stream channels,
as well as the removal of streamside vegeta tion to provide dredging equipment
access to the stream.
5. Sediment deposition is a measure of the amount of sediment that has been
deposited in the stream channel and the changes to the stream bottom that have
occurred as a result of the deposition. High levels of sediment deposition create an
uns table and continually changing environment that is unsuitable for many aquatic
organisms.
Sediments are naturally deposited in areas where the stream flow is reduced, such
as pools and bends, or where flow is obstructed. These deposits can lead to the
-------
formation of islands, shoals, or point bars (sediments that build up in the stream,
usually a t the beginning of a meander) or can result in the complete filling of
pools. To determine whether these sediment deposits are new, look for vegetation
growing on them: new sediments will not yet have been colonized by vegetation.
6. Stream velocity and depth combinations are important to the maintenance of
healthy aquatic communities. Fast water increases the amount of dissolved oxygen
in the water; keeps pools from being filled with sediment; and helps food items
like leaves, twigs, and algae move more quickly through the aquatic system. Slow
water provides spawning areas for fish and shelters macroinvertebrates that might
be washed downstream in higher stream velocities. Similarly, shallow water tends
to be more easi ly aerated (i.e., it holds more oxygen), but deeper water stays
cooler longer. Thus the best stream habitat includes all of the following
velocity/depth combinations and can maintain a wide variety of organisms.
slow (<1 ft/sec), shallow (<1.5 ft)
slow, deep
fast, deep
fast, shallow
Measure stream velocity by marking off a 10-foot section of stream run and
measuring the time it takes a stick, orange, or other floating biodegradable object
to float the 10 feet. Repeat 5 times, in the same 10-foot section, and determine the
average tim e. Divide the distance (10 feet) by the average time (seconds) to
determine the velocity in feet per second.
Measure the stream depth by using a stick of known length and taking readings at
various points within your stream site, including riffles, runs, and pools. Compare
velocity and depth at various points within the 100-yard site to see how many of
the combi nations are present.
7. Channel flow status is the percent of the existing channel that is filled with water.
The flow status changes as the channel enlarges or as flow decreases as a result of
dams and other obstructions, diversions for irrigation, or drought. Wh en water
does not cover much of the streambed, the living area for aquatic organisms is
limited.
For the last three parameters, evaluate the condition of the right and left stream banks
separately. Define the " left" and "right" banks by standing at the downstream end of your
study stretch and looking upstream. Each bank is evaluated on a scale of 0- 10.
1. Bank vegetative protection measures the amount of the stream bank that is covered
by natural (i.e., growing wild and not obviously planted) vegetation. The root
systems of plants growing on stream banks help hold soil in place, reducing ero
sion. Vegetation on banks provides shade for fish and macroinvertebrates and
serves as a food source by dropping leaves and other organic matter into the
stream. Ideally, a variety of vegetation should be present, including trees, shrubs,
and grasses. Veg etative disruption can occur when the grasses and plants on the
stream banks are mowed or grazed, or when the trees and shrubs are cut back or
-------
cleared.
Condition of banks measures erosion potential and whether the stream banks are
eroded. Steep banks are more likely to collapse and suffer from erosion than are
gently sloping banks and are therefore considered to have a high erosion potenti al.
Signs of erosion include crumbling, unvegetated banks, exposed tree roots, and
exposed soil.
The riparian vegetative zone width is defined here as the width of natural
vegetation from the edge of the stream bank. The riparian vegetative zone is a
buffer zone to pollutants entering a stream from runoff. It also controls erosion and
provides stream habitat and nutrient input into the stream.
A wide, relatively undisturbed riparian vegetative zone reflects a healthy stream
system; narrow, far less useful riparian zones occur when roads, parking lots,
fields, lawns, and other artificially cultivated areas, bare soil, rocks, or buildings
are nea r the stream bank. The presence of "old fields" (i.e., previously developed
agricultural fields allowed to revert to natural conditions) should rate higher than
fields in continuous or periodic use. In arid areas, the riparian vegetative zone can
be measu red by observing the width of the area dominated by riparian or
water-loving plants, such as willows, marsh grasses, and cottonwood trees.
Note: Instructions on sample processing, macroinvertebrate identification, and data
analysis follow the sections on muddy-bottom macroinvertebrate sampling and
habitat assessment. (See Step 3)
Muddy-Bottom Sampling
Part 1: Macroinvertebrate Sampling
In muddy-bottom streams, as in rocky- bottom streams, the goal is to sample the
most productive habitat available and look for the widest variety of organisms. The
most productive habitat is the one that harbors a diverse population of
pollution-sensitive macroinvertebrates. Volunteers should sample by using a
D-frame net to jab at the habitat and scoop up the organisms that are dislodged.
The idea is to collect a total sample that consists of 20 jabs taken from a variety of
habitats.
TASK 1 Determine which habitats are present
Muddy-bottom streams usually have four habitats (Fig. 4.17). It is generally best to
concentrate sampling efforts on the most productive habitat available, yet to
sample other principal habitats if they are present. This ensures that you will secure
as wi de a variety of organisms as possible. Not all habitats are present in all
streams or present in significant amounts. If your sampling areas have not been
preselected, try to determine which of the following habitats are present. (Avoid
standing in the st ream while making your habitat determinations.)
-------
/f
UJ
o Vegetated bank
margins consist
of overhanging
bank vegetation
and submerged
root mats
attached to
banks. The bank
margins may
also contain
submerged,
decomposing
leaf packs
trapped in root
wads or lining
the streambanks.
This is generally
a highly
productive
habitat in a
muddy-bottom
stream, and it is ;
often the most \ ' ' ' , ,. ,
abundant type of ,,,,.,.
habitat.
o Snags and logs consist of submerged wood, primarily dead trees, logs,
branches, roots, cypress knees and leaf packs lodged between rocks or logs.
This is also a very productive muddy-bottom stream habitat.
o Aquatic vegetation beds and decaying organic matter consist of beds of
submerged, green/leafy plants that are attached to the stream bottom. This
habitat can be as productive as vegetated bank margins, and snags and logs.
o Silt/sand/gravel substrate includes sandy, silty, or muddy stream bottoms;
rocks along the stream bottom; and/or wetted gravel bars. This habitat may
also contains algae-covered rocks (sometimes called Aufwuchs). This is the
least productiv e of the four muddy-bottom stream habitats, and it is always
present in one form or another (e.g., silt, sand, mud, or gravel might
predominate).
TASK 2 Determine how many times to jab in each
habitat type
Your goal is to jab a total of 20 times. The D-frame net is 1 foot wide, and a jab
should be approximately 1 foot in length. Thus, 20 jabs equals 20 square feet of
combined habitat.
-------
o If all four habitats are present in plentiful amounts, jab the vegetated banks
10 times and divide the remaining 10 jabs among the remaining 3 habitats.
o If three habitats are present in plentiful amounts and one is absent, jab the
silt/sand/gravel substrate the least productive habitat 5 times and divide the
remaining 15 jabs among the other two more productive habitats.
o If only two habitats are present in plentiful amounts, the silt/sand/gravel
substrate will most likely be one of those habitats. Jab the silt/sand/gravel
substrate 5 times and the more productive habitat 15 times.
o If some habitats are plentiful and others are sparse, sample the sparse
habitats to the extent possible, even if you can take only one or two jabs.
Take the remaining jabs from the plentiful habitat(s). This rule also applies if
you cannot reach a habitat because of unsafe stream conditions. Jab a total of
20 times.
Because you might need to make an educated guess to decide how many jabs to
take in each habitat type, it is critical that you note, on the field data sheet, how
many jabs you took in each habitat. This information can be used to help
characterize your fi ndings.
TASK 3 Get into place
Outside and downstream of your first sampling location (1st habitat), rinse the dip
net and check to make sure it does not contain any macroinvertebrates or debris
from the last time it was used. Fill a bucket approximately one-third full with clean
strea m water. Also, fill the spray bottle with clean stream water. This bottle will
be used to wash down the net between jabs and after sampling is completed.
This method of sampling requires only one person to disturb the stream habitats.
While one person is sampling, a second person should stand outside the sampling
area, holding the bucket and spray bottle. After every few jabs, the sampler should
hand the n et to the second person, who then can rinse the contents of the net into
the bucket.
TASK 4 Dislodge the macroinvertebrates
Approach the first sample site from downstream, and sample as you walk
upstream. Here is how to sample in the four habitat types:
o Sample vegetated bank margins by jabbing vigorously, with an upward
motion, brushing the net against vegetation and roots along the bank. The
entire jab motion should occur underwater.
o To sample snags and logs, hold the net with one hand under the section of
submerged wood you are sampling (Fig. 4.18). With the other hand (which
should be gloved), rub about 1 square foot of area on the snag or log. Scoop
organisms, bark, twigs, or other organic matter you dislodge into your net.
Each combination of log rubbing and net scooping is one jab.
-------
o
To
sample
aquatic
vegetation
beds,
jab
vigorously,
with
an
upward
motion,
against
or
through
the
plant
bed.
The
entire
jab
motion
should
occur
-------
underwater.
o To sample a silt/sand/gravel substrate, place the net with one edge against
the stream bottom and push it forward about a foot (in an upstream
direction) to dislodge the first few inches of silt, sand, gravel, or rocks. To
avoid gathering a netful of mud, periodically sweep the mesh bottom of the
net back and forth in the water, making sure that water does not run over the
top of the net. This will allow fine silt to rinse out of the net. When you have
completed all 20 jabs, rinse the net thorough ly into the bucket. If necessary,
pick any clinging organisms from the net by hand and put them in the
bucket.
TASK 5 Preserve the sample
1. Look through the material in the bucket and immediately return any fish,
amphibians, or reptiles to the stream. Carefully remove large pieces of debris
(leaves, twigs, and rocks) from the sample. While holding the material over
the bucket, use the forceps, spray bottle, and your hands to pick, rub, and
rinse the leaves, twigs, and rocks to remove any attached organisms. Use
your magnifying lens and forceps to find and remove small organisms
clinging to the debris. When you are satisfied that the m aterial is clean,
discard it back into the stream.
2. You will need to drain off the water before transferring material to the jar.
This process will require two team members. One person should place the
net into the second bucket, like a sieve (this bucket, which has not yet been
used, should be com pletely empty) and hold it securely. The second person
can now carefully pour the remaining contents of bucket #1 onto the center
of the net to drain the water and concentrate the organisms.
Use care when pouring so that organisms are not lost over the side of the net.
Use your spray bottle, forceps, sugar scoop, and gloved hands to remove all
the material from bucket #1 onto the net. When you are satisfied that bucket
#1 is empty, use your h ands and the sugar scoop to transfer all the material
from the net into the empty jar. You can also try to carefully empty the
contents of the net directly into the jar by turning the net inside out into the
jar.
Bucket #2 captured the water and any organisms that might have fallen
through the netting. As a final check, repeat the process above, but this time,
pour bucket #2 over the net, into bucket #1. Transfer any organisms on the
net into the jar.
3. Fill the jar (so that all material is submerged) with alcohol. Put the lid tightly
back onto the jar and gently turn the jar upside down two or three times to
distribute the alcohol and remove air bubbles.
4. Complete the sampling station ID tag. Be sure to use a pencil, not a pen,
-------
because the ink will run in the alcohol. The tag should include your station
number, the stream, location (e.g., upstream from a road crossing), date,
time, and the names of the members of the collecting crew. Place the ID tag
into the sample container, writing side facing out, so that identification can
be seen clearly (Fig. 4.19).
STATION ID TAG
Station #:
Stream:
Location:
Date/Time:
Team members:
/; • ••. 1 C
Muddy-Bottom
Streams
Part2: Habitat
Assessment
You will conduct a
habitat assessment
(which will include
measuring general
characteristics and local
land use) in a 100-yard
section of the stream
that includes the habitat
areas from which
organisms were
collected.
TASK1
Delineate the
habitat
assessment boundaries
1. Begin by identifying the most downstream point that was sampled for
macroinvertebrates. Using your tape measure or twine, mark off a 100-yard
section extending 25 yards below the downstream sampling point and about
75 yards upstream.
2. Complete the identifying information on your field data sheet for your
habitat assessment site. On your stream sketch, be as detailed as possible,
and be sure to note which habitats were sampled.
TASK 2 Complete the General Characteristics and
Local Land Use sections of the field sheet
For safety reasons as well as to protect the stream habitat, it is best to estimate
these characteristics rather than actually wading into the stream to measure them.
For instructions on completing these sections of the field data sheet, see the
rocky-bot torn habitat assessment instructions.
-------
TASK 3 Conduct the habitat assessment
The following information describes the parameters you will evaluate for
muddy-bottom habitats. Use these definitions when completing the habitat
assessment field data sheet.
1. Shelter for fish and attachment sites for macroinvertebrates are essentially
the amount of living space and shelter (rocks, snags, and undercut banks)
available for fish, insects, and snails. Many insects attach themselves to
rocks, logs, b ranches, or other submerged substrates. Fish can hide or feed
in these areas. The greater the variety and number of available shelter sites
or attachment sites, the greater the variety offish and insects in the stream.
Many of the attachment sites result from debris falling into the stream from
the surrounding vegetation. When debris first falls into the water, it is
termed new fall and it has not yet been "broken down" by microbes
(conditioned) for macroinvertebrate co lonization. Leaf material or debris
that is conditioned is called old fall. Leaves that have been in the stream for
some time lose their color, turn brown or dull yellow, become soft and
supple with age, and might be slimy to the touch. Woody debris becom es
blackened or dark in color; smooth bark becomes coarse and partially
disintegrated, creating holes and crevices. It might also be slimy to the
touch.
2. Pool substrate characterization evaluates the type and condition of bottom
substrates found in pools. Pools with firmer sediment types (e.g., gravel,
sand) and rooted aquatic plants support a wider variety of organisms than do
pools with su bstrates dominated by mud or bedrock and no plants. In
addition, a pool with one uniform substrate type will support far fewer types
of organisms than will a pool with a wide variety of substrate types.
3. Pool variability rates the overall mixture of pool types found in the stream
according to size and depth. The four basic types of pools are large-shallow,
large-deep, small-shallow, and small-deep. A stream with many pool types
will support a wide variety of aquatic species. Rivers with low sinuosity
(few bends) and monotonous pool characteristics do not have sufficient
quantities and types of habitats to support a diverse aquatic community.
4. Channel alteration (See description in habitat assessment for rocky-bottom
streams.)
5. Sediment deposition (See description for rocky-bottom streams.)
6. Channel sinuosity evaluates the sinuosity or meandering of the stream.
Streams that meander provide a variety of habitats (such as pools and runs)
and stream velocities and reduce the energy from current surges during
storm events. Straight stream segments are characterized by even stream
depth and unvarying velocity, and they are prone to flooding. To evaluate
this parameter, imagine how much longer the stream would be if it were
-------
straightened out.
7. Channel flow status (See description in habitat assessment for rocky-bottom
streams.)
8. Bank vegetative protection (See description for rocky-bottom streams.)
9. Condition of banks (See description for rocky-bottom streams.)
10. The riparian vegetative zone width (See description for rocky-bottom
streams.)
Reference Collection
A reference collection is a sample of locally-found macroinvertebrates
that have been identified, labelled, and preserved in alcohol. The program
advisor, along with a professional biologist/entomologist, should
assemble the reference collection, properly identify all samples, preserve
them in vials, and label them. This collection may then be used as a
training tool and, in the field, as an aid in macroinvertebrate
identification.
Step 3 Leave the field, complete data forms, clean
the site, and return material
After completing the stream characterization and habitat assessment, make
sure that all of the field data sheets have been completed properly and that
the information is legible. Be sure to include the site's identifying name and
the sampling date on each sheet. These will function as a quality control
element. If you can't determine how to answer a question on the field data
sheet, just leave the space blank.
Before you leave the stream location, make sure that all your equipment has
been collected and rinsed properly. Double-check to see that sample jars are
tightly closed and properly identified. All samples, field sheets, and
equipment should be returned to the coordinator at this point. You might
want to keep a copy of the field data sheet for comparison with future
monitoring trips and for personal records.
Step 4 Prepare for macro-invertebrate laboratory
work
This step includes all the work needed to set up a laboratory for processing
samples into subsamples and identifying macroinvertebrates to the family
level. A professional biologist/entomologist or the program advisor should
supervise the identification p rocedure. All interested volunteers should be
encouraged to participate. In general it is a good idea to train volunteers in
identification procedures before each lab session and to start new volunteers
-------
with less diverse samples. Refresher workshops for e xperienced volunteers
are strongly encouraged.
TASK 1 Gather tools and equipment for the
laboratory
The following lab equipment is recommended for the macroinvertebrate
identification process. Enough of each will need to be provided for each
volunteer work station:
• Reference collection and taxonomic keys
• Fine-point forceps
• Petri dishes or small, shallow, clear container
• Alcohol preservative (used in field and lab): 70 percent ethyl alcohol,
denatured; no other preservatives used
• Microscope, dissecting microscope, and magnifying glass, or hands
lens
• Sample containers, preferably shatterproof with poly-seal caps that
prevent evaporation of the preservative (jars or vials are used in field
and lab). Shatterproof vials with poly-seal caps are available from
scientific supply houses.
• Wash bottles or spray bottles
• Shallow, rectangular white pans (large enough to hold entire
macroinvertebrate sample)
• Additional shallow white containers (heavy duty plastic plates with a
rim, white pans, or cafeteria trays are all possible choices).
• Plastic spoons or unslotted spatulas
• Sieve, purchased from scientific supply company (#30) or homemade
(with same mesh size as sampling net)
• Permanent ink markers
• Ruler
• Macroinvertebrate assessment worksheet
• Pencils
• Note paper for counting
TASK 2 Create gridded subsampling pans
Using the ruler, measure the inside width and length of the large rectangular
white pan. Draw a grid of evenly sized squares on the inside of the pan,
using permanent ink. The grid should fill the entire inside of the pan.
Number each square. One pan will be needed for each work station.
-------
Volunteers will use these pans for randomizing the sample and selecting a
subsample of organisms.
TASK 3 Prepare the lab and the individual work
stations
Before volunteers enter the lab, the program manager will need to prepare
work stations. Make sure that all microscopes are functioning properly and
that each station has access to all other equipment. The reference collection
should be centrally located as should any other visual training displays. The
lab itself should be well lit and well ventilated. A copy of lab safety
instructions should be visible to all volunteers.
Step 5
Conduct
macro!nvertebrate processing and identification
If possible, before beginning the subsampling and identification processes,
all volunteers should become familiar with the lab equipment,
microscope(s), the reference collection, and the taxonomic key chosen by
the advisor. Processing a subsample and ide ntifying the organisms are two
separate activities. Some programs might prefer to split these tasks into
separate lab sessions.
Session 1
Picking a subsample oi
'aquatic organisms
-------
TASK 1 Prepare the sample
1. Carefully remove the station ID tag from the sample container and put
it aside. You will need it later.
2. Cover the bottom of the gridded pan with about 1/4 inch of clean
water.
3. Pour the preserved sample (alcohol and debris) into the sieve and
wash off preservative over a sink, using a spray or wash bottle filled
with water.
4. Transfer the sample to the white gridded pan by turning the sieve
upside down over the pan. Tap it several times to empty the contents
onto the pan. Squirt a small amount of water over the bottom of the
sieve to flush the organisms into the pan.
5. With your hands and by gently shaking the pan, evenly disperse the
sample over the entire bottom of the pan, making sure that even the
corners are covered. The water will help in distributing the sample
throughout the pan. This is called randomizi ng the sample.
TASK 2 Randomly select a square for the
subsample
1. Randomly choose a square to start sorting organisms. You may use a
random numbers table, draw numbers from a hat, or roll a pair of dice.
The most important thing to remember is that the grid selection should
be random. Indicate the square number selected on the lab sheet.
2. Using a plastic spoon or unslotted spatula, remove all the material
from the square and transfer it to another container (another pan, tray,
or plate) for sorting. The organisms in this container will become your
subsample.
TASK 3 Pick the subsample
1. Prepare a container to house the subsample by filling a vial or jar
one-half full of alcohol. Place the new label into the vial, writing side
out. Keep the vial on a flat, stable area.
2. Using forceps, carefully and systematically remove all organisms
from the pan or tray and place them one by one into the prepared
subsample vial. Examine all debris such as leaves or sticks for
clinging organisms. Count each organism as it is tran sferred. Keep a
written count of the number of organisms you have transferred. The
objective is have at least 100 individual organisms in your subsample.
If you reach 100 and there are still organisms remaining in your
subsample plate or tray, continue pi eking until all the organisms are
-------
removed even though you might end up with more than 100.
When you think all the organisms have been transferred from the plate
or tray to the subsample vial, have a second volunteer check to
confirm that all organisms have been removed. On your lab sheet,
record how many organisms are in the subsample.
3. If you finish picking the contents of the first square selected and have
fewer than 100 organisms, randomly select another square and repeat
the process of removing the contents of the square to the subsample
plate or tray; picking organisms with the forceps and transferring them
to the vial (all organisms that will be part of the subsample should be
transferred to the same vial). Record the number of organisms you
obtain from the second square. Repeat this process until at least 100
organisms hav e been placed into the vial or until the entire sample in
the gridded pan has been picked clean. Remember, any square started
must be picked clean.
If, after picking the entire gridded pan clean, you have fewer than 100
organisms, and your reference site produced 100 or more organisms,
either your site is impaired or your sampling technique is flawed. It is
also possible that recent heavy rains migh t have washed many
organisms downstream. If you do not find 100 organisms in the entire
sample, be sure to note the potential cause for such a problem on the
Habitat Assessment Data Sheet.
TASK 4 Label and store the subsample
Fill out a new Subsample ID Tag (Fig. 4.21) for the subsample. Remember
to use pencil because ink will run in the alcohol. The vial housing the
subsample must be labeled with the same station number, stream name,
location, and date found on the original s ample ID tag. The vial tag should
also include information on when the subsample was picked (i.e., 100 or
more organisms counted) and by whom. Place the tag in the vial with the
writing side out. Make sure the vial is tightly closed before giving the subs
ample in the vial to the program coordinator.
TASK 5 Replace remainder of original sample
back into the sample jar
Place the remaining sample back into the original container. Be sure that the
original station ID tag is included, writing side out. Fill the jar with 70
percent alcohol. This sample will be retained as part of a voucher collection.
Make sure the jar is t ightly closed before returning it to the program
coordinator.
-------
c . ~ Identifying the subsample to
Session 2:f ., , ,
family level
TASK1
Prepare
for the ID
1. Make
sure that
you have
several
petri
dishes,
fresh
alcohol,
and fresh
water
close at
hand.
Also
have
your
taxonomic
keys
handy for
all stages
of the ID
process.
Check to
make
sure that
your
microscope
is
working
properly.
2. Carefully
remove
the
station
ID tag
from the
subsample
vial and
SUBSAMPLE ID TAG
Station #:
Stream:
Location:
Date/Time:
Subsample team members:
-------
put it
aside.
You will
need it
later. Be
sure no
organisms
are
clinging
to it. If
they are,
remove
them
with
forceps.
Using the
information
on the
station
ID tag,
complete
the first
section
of the
Macroinvertebrate
Assessment
Sheet
with your
name,
date, the
stream
name,
station
number,
and any
other
information
requested.
TASK 2 Identify the sample to order level
1. Place a few of the macroinvertebrates in a petri dish (or other small,
shallow container) and examine them under the microscope. Include
some ethyl alcohol in the dish to ensure that the organisms do not dry
-------
out. Compare the organisms in the dish to those in the taxonomic key
and/or reference collection.
2. Roughly sort organisms by taxonomic order into petri dishes. Many
volunteers find it helpful to use one dish for every major taxonomic
order found in the subsample. Place any organism that you cannot
identify into another dish for the biological a dvisor to examine.
TASK 3 Identify the organisms within each order
to family level
1. Starting with one order, and using the taxonomic keys, reference
collection, and assistance of the biological advisor, identify each
individual to family level.
2. Keep a running count of how many individuals there are in each
family on a piece of scratch paper.
3. Place any organisms that you cannot identify into a separate container.
Make sure that the biological advisor sees them and assists you with
the ID.
4. After all organisms have been identified, note the total number of
organisms in each family on the Macroinvertebrate Assessment Sheet.
Write in pencil and make sure your writing is legible. These lab sheets
will be the basis for the data analysis. It is important that they are
accurate and easy to read.
TASK 4 Return the organisms to the vial
1. After you have identified and counted all organisms in the subsample,
return them to the subsample vial and replace the subsample ID Tag,
writing side out.
2. Refill the subsample vial with 70 percent ethyl alcohol (new or
recycled). Be sure to secure the caps on the vial tightly to prevent the
organisms from drying out.
3. Return the subsample vial and the assessment worksheet to the
program manager.
-------
Voucher Collection
Maintaining a voucher collection adds another layer of credibility to the
program by documenting the accuracy of the volunteer identifications. It
substantiates and provides evidence to support the analysis of the data—a
powerful quality control element. However, an important issue to
consider is how long to keep the samples. Program managers, in
collaboration with technical advisors, will have to consider the following
in keeping a voucher collection.
• Sample maintenance. Even jars and vials with tight fitting lids
require maintenance on a regular basis (every 2-3 months) to
ensure that alcohol levels are adequate.
• Fire safety. When you are dealing with alcohol, you will need to
consider fire safety and ventilation issues to make sure that you are
in line with local codes.
• Availability of storage space. In addition to needing well-ventilated
and fire-proof storage cabinet, you will need a well-ventilated room
to store samples. Samples should not be stored in someone's office
for any length of time.
• Length of storage. How long samples should be maintained is an
issue determined by program goals. Data collected for regulatory
purposes will probably require longer storage than other samples.
Generally, 1-5 years is recommended for storage.
Step 6 Performing habitat assessment data
analysis
To evaluate the condition of your stream site properly, you should compare
it to an optimal or best condition found in the region. This is called a
reference condition. In an ideal world, the reference condition would reflect
the water quality, habitat, a nd aquatic life characteristics of pristine sites in
the same ecological region as your stream. In real life, however, few pristine
sites remain. The reference condition is, therefore, a composite of sites that
reflect the best physical, chemical, and bio logical conditions existing in
your ecological region. State water quality or natural resource agencies
might have already established reference conditions for the ecological
regions in your state.
Your program's consulting biologist should work in cooperation with the
state agency to identify the reference condition(s) you will need to conduct
an Intensive Stream Biosurvey. The biologist will use the reference
condition to establish a water quality rating system against which to rank
your monitored stream sites.
-------
To perform the habitat assessment data analysis for the Intensive Stream
Biosurvey, perform the following tasks.
TASK 1 Determine the habitat index score
Add together the scores of all 10 habitat parameters. This sum is the habitat
index score for the study stretch.
TASK 2 Determine the percent similarity to the
reference score
Divide the habitat index score by the reference index score and then multiply
the result by 100. This number is the percent similarity to the reference
score.
TASK 3 Determine the stream habitat quality
rating
Compare the percent similarity of your results with the range of percent
similarity numbers in the stream habitat rating table to obtain the habitat
quality category for your site(s) (Table 4.5). Enter the appropriate
descriptive rating (excellent, good, fair, or poor) on the field data sheet. If
your score falls at or near the break between habitat quality categories, use
your best judgment to determine an appropriate rating.
% Similarity
to Reference
Score
Habitat
Quality
Category
Attributes
>90%
Excellent
Commparable to the
best situation to be
expected within an
ecoregion. Excellent
overall habitat structure
conducive to
supporting healthy
biological community.
-------
75-88%
60-73%
<58%
Good
Fair
Poor
Habitat structure
slightly impaired.
Generally, diverse
instream habitat
well-developed; some
degradation of riparian
zone and banks; a small
amount of channel
alteration may be
present.
Loss of habitat
compared to reference.
Habitat is a major
limiting factor to
supporting a healthy
biological community.
Severe habitat
alteration at all levels.
score.
Step 7 Conduct macroinvertebrate data analysis
In general, the program's biological advisor, rather than the volunteers,
should analyze the results of the Intensive Stream Biosurvey's
macroinvertebrate identification. The advisor's knowledge of local
ecological conditions will help in the interpretati on of the data findings and
will lend additional credibility to the sampling effort. Volunteers can
contribute significantly to the advisor's data analysis by interpreting field
notes, assisting with macroinvertebrate identification, and counting
organism s on the aquatic macroinvertebrate assessment worksheet. Relay
the results of the data analysis to the volunteers as soon after the sampling
date as possible.
TASK 1 Determine which metrics or
measurements are appropriate
A number of metrics (or measures) can be used to calculate stream health
using benthic macroinvertebrates. These metrics should be calculated for
both the sample site and the reference condition. By comparing the two, the
program advisor can reach a clear understanding of the biological health of
the sampling site.
The Intensive Stream Biosurvey recommends the use of four basic metrics
-------
(taxa richness, number of EPT taxa, percent abundance of EPT, and
sensitive taxa index) plus two optional metrics (percent abundance of
scrapers and percent abundance of shredders). T hese metrics are discussed
briefly below. Refer to the reference list for more information.
The term taxa (plural for taxon), used below, refers to the specific
taxonomic groupings to which organisms have been identified. For the
Intensive Stream Biosurvey, organisms are identified to the taxon of family.
Your volunteer monitoring program should identify organisms to a specific
taxonomic grouping if it is to compare results over time and between sites.
The following metrics are generally applicable throughout the country (but
confirm this with a local biologist).
1. Number of taxa (taxa richness)—this measure is a count of the number
of taxa (e.g., families) found in the sample. A high diversity or variety
is good.
2. Number of EPT taxa (EPT richness)--this measure is a count of the
number of taxa in each of three generally pollution-sensitive orders:
Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera (stoneflies), and Trichoptera
(caddisflies). A high diversity or va riety is good.
3. Percent dominance—this measure is the percent composition of the
most abundant family from your station. It indicates how dominant a
single taxon is at a particular site. A high percent dominance is not
good.
4. Sensitive taxa index (modifiedHilsenhqff index)—this measure is
calculated by multiplying the number of organisms in each taxon by
the pollution tolerance value assigned to each taxon, adding these for
all taxa represented in the sample, and dividing by the total number of
taxa in the sample. A high index number is not good.
Sensitive taxa index = E(Xit)/«
where:
E = the summation of Xjt
Xj = the number of individuals in each taxon
t = tolerance value for each taxon in the sample
n = number of individuals in the sample
The following optional metrics can be used in rocky-bottom streams if at
least 10 scraper and shredder organisms are collected.
5. Percent abundance of scrapers—in the majority of rocky-bottom
streams, the basic food source for many aquatic organisms is algae
covering the rocks in the stream.
-------
Macroinvertebrates that "scrape" or graze on these algae are known as
scrapers. To compute the percent abundance of the scrapers in the
macroinvertebrate community, divide the number of organisms
classified as grazers or scrapers by the total number of organisms in
the sample. A high percent abundance of scrapers is good.
6. Percent abundance of shredders—leaf litter and other plant debris are
broken down and processed by organisms called shredders. To
compute the percent abundance of shredders in the macroinvertebrate
community, divide the number of organisms classified as shredders by
the total number of organisms in the sample. A high percent
abundance of shredders is good.
The following optional metrics can be used in muddy-bottom streams
as additional metrics to provide more information about the condition
of the macroinvertebrate assemblage.
7. Percent abundance of EPT—this measure compares the number of
organisms in the EPT orders to the total number of organisms in the
sample. (The number of organisms in the EPT orders is divided by the
total number of organisms in the sample t o calculate a percent
abundance.) A high percent abundance of EPT orders is good.
8. Percent abundance of midge larvae—this measure compares the
number of midges to the total number of organisms in the sample.
(The number of organisms in the chironomidae family is divided by
the total number of organisms in the sample to c alculate a percent
composition.) A low percent abundance of midge larvae is good.
TASK 2 Calculate a score for the site
The metric worksheets Tables 4.6 and 4.7 are designed to help calculate a
total score for the monitored site. Table 4.8 provides an example of a sample
metric worksheet for the fie tional Volunteer Creek (rocky-bottom stream).
This score should be compared to reference conditions to determine the
biological condition of the stream at that site. You should also note that
these worksheets were developed for use in mid-Atlantic states; they might
need to be modified to reflect local conditions.
To calculate a score for your stream site using one of these worksheets, enter
the metric values at the monitored site in the (M) column. Compare each
metric value from your monitored site to the value ranges presented in the
biosurvey score columns. Choo se the matching range and circle it; this
gives you the corresponding score (6, 3, or 0) for your metric value. Add the
metric scores to obtain the total biosurvey score (see instructions in Tables
4.6and4.7).
-------
TASK 3 Determine the biological condition
To determine the biological condition of the site, refer to Table 4.9,
Biosurvey Scoring Guide.
TASK 4 Return the lab sheets and metric
worksheets to the program coordinator
All remaining worksheets should be returned to the program coordinator
once the site's final score has been determined. The program coordinator will
determine how to proceed with the findings of the biological assessment
(e.g., the data may be entered int o a database or shared with a state or local
agency). It is important that the biological advisor include documentation of
any problems encountered in the process of monitoring, identifying
macroinvertebrates, or analyzing the data.
References and Further Reading
Note: References marked with (k) contain macroinvertebrate taxonomic
keys.
Brigham, A. R., W. U. Brigham, and A. Gnilka. 1982. Aquatic Insects and
Oligochaetes of North and South Carolina. Midwest Enterprises, Mahomet,
IL. (k)
Cummins, Kenneth W. and Margaret A. Wilzbach. 1985. Field Procedures
for Analysis of Functional Feeding Groups of Stream Macroinvertebrates.
University of Maryland, Frostburg. (k)
Dates, G. and J. Byrne. 1995. River Watch Network Benthic
Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Manual. River Watch Network. 153 State
St., Montpelier, VT 05602 ($25). (k)
Delaware Nature Education Center. 1996. Delaware Stream Watch Guide.
Delaware Nature Society, P.O. Box 700, Hockessin, DE 19707.
Fore, L., J. Karr, and R. Wiseman. 1996. Assessing Invertebrate Responses
to Human Activities: Evaluating Alternative Approaches. Journal of the
North American Benthological Society. 15(2):212-231.
Hilsenhoff, William L. 1982. Using a Biotic Index to Evaluate Water
Quality in Streams. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison,
WI. Technical Bulletin No. 132.
Hilsenhoff, William L. 1988. Rapid Field Assessment of Organic Pollution
With a Family-level Biotic Index. Journal of the North American
-------
Benthological Society, 7:65-68.
Izaak Walton League of America (IWLA). 1992. A Monitor's Guide to
Aquatic Macro invertebrates. Izaak Walton League of America Save Our
Streams. 707 Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg, MD 20878. (k)
Izaak Walton League of America (IWLA). Stream Insects and Crustaceans
Card. Izaak Walton League of America Save Our Streams. 707
Conservation Lane, Gaithersburg, MD 20878. (k)
Karr, J. R. In press. Rivers As Sentinels: Using the Biology of Rivers to
Guide Landscape Management. In The Ecology and Management of Streams
and Rivers in the Pacific Northwest Coastal Ecoregion. Springer-Verlag,
NY
Klemm, D.J., et al. 1990. Macroinvertebrate Field and Laboratory Methods
for Evaluating the Biological Integrity of Surface Waters.
EPA/600/4-90/030. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.
Lathrop, J. 1989. A Naturalist's Key to Stream Macroinvertebrates for
Citizen Monitoring Programs in the Midwest. In Proceedings of the 1989
Midwest Pollution Control Biologists Meeting, Chicago IL, EPA
9059-89/007, ed. W.S. Davis and T.P. Simon, U SEPA Region 5 Instream
Biocriteria and Ecological Assessment Committee. Chicago, Illinois, (k)
Maryland Save Our Streams. 1994. Project Heartbeat Volunteer Monitoring
Handbook. Maryland Save Our Streams, 258 Scotts Manor Dr., Glen Burnie,
MD 21061.
McCafferty, W. P. 1981. Aquatic Entomology: The Fishermen's and
Ecologists'Illustrated Guide to Insects and Their Relatives. Science Books
International, Boston, (k)
McDonald, B., W. Borden, and J. Lathrop. Citizen Stream Monitoring: A
Manual for Illinois. ILENR/RE-WR90/18. Illinois Department of Energy
and Natural Resources.
Merritt, R. W. and K. W. Cummins, eds. 1984. An Introduction to the
Aquatic Insects of North America. 2nd. ed. Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company, Dubuque. (k)
Moen, C. and J. Schoen. 1994. Habitat Monitoring. The Volunteer Monitor
6(2): 1
Needham, James C. and Paul R. Needham. 1988. A Guide to the Study of
Fresh-Water Biology. Reiter's Scientific and Professional Books,
Washington, D.C. (k)
-------
Peckarsky, Barbara L. et al., 1990. Freshwater Macroinvertebrates of
Northeastern North America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.
Pennak, Robert W. 1989. Fresh-Water Invertebrates of the United States:
Protoza to Mollusca. 3rd. ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York, (k)
Plafkin, J.L., M.T. Harbour, K.D. Porter. S.K. Gross, and R.M. Hughes.
1989. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers:
Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. EPA 440/4-89-001. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetland s, Oceans, and
Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC 20460.
River Watch Network. 1992. A Simple Picture Key: Major Groups of
Benthic Macroinvertebrates Commonly Found in Freshwater New England
Streams. River Watch Network, 153 State St., Montpelier, VT 05602 (k)
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). 1994. Common Aquatic Flora and
Fauna of the Tennessee Valley. Water Quality Series Booklet 4. TVA,
Chattanooga, TN. (k)
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). 1988. Homemade Sampling Equipment.
Water Quality Series Booklet 2. TVA, Chattanooga, TN.
Thorp, J.H. and A.P. Covich, eds. 1991. Ecology and Classification of North
American Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, NY. (Especially
Chapter 17 by W.L. Hilsenhoff) (k)
USEPA. 1992. Streamwalk Manual. March. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region 10, Water Management Division, Seattle, WA.
USEPA. 1994. Biological Criteria: Technical Guidance for Small Streams
and Rivers. EPA 822-B-94-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC
20460.
USEPA. 1996. The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Project
Plans. EPA 841-B-96-003. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, 4503F, Washington, DC 20460.
Intensive Biosurvey: Macroinvertebrate Assessment (PDF,
90.5 KB)
Intensive Biosurvey: Habitat Assessment (PDF, 80.8)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of
the Adobe Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for
assisted technologies is also available.
-------
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
of
United Slates
Environmental
t'rnlt*-t:{ inn
home
Selecting Metrics to Determine Stream Health
Back to Section 4.3 - Intensive Stream Biosurvey
Metrics are used to analyze and interpret biological data by condensing lists of organisms
into relevant biological information. In order to be useful, metrics must be proven to
respond in predictable ways to various types and intensities of stream impacts. This
manual recommends using a multimetric approach that combines several metrics into a
total Biosurvey Score. The four primary and two optional metrics discussed in this
chapter have been tested extensively in the mid-Atlantic region and have been shown to
respond in predictable ways to stream impacts. In other parts of the country, other metrics
and scoring systems may be more appropriate. For example, the Benthic Index of Biotic
Integrity (B-IBI), developed by Dr. James Karr, is another multimetric approach, using
different metrics, that has been tested in the Tennessee Valley, the Midwest, and the
northwest. The River Watch Network suggests that, while you should always use
multiple metrics to summarize your data, you shouldn't rely solely on an overall score to
interpret your data; individual metrics can also provide a wealth of information. In any
case you will need to select metrics that have been proven to respond predictably to
various impacts. As always, consult with your program's biological advisor for help in
selecting appropriate metrics for your region and for determining whether an overall
biosurvey score is recommended.
Below are metrics that are commonly used in rocky bottom streams. This is only a partial
list of the dozens of metrics used by monitoring programs throughout the country. These
metrics fall under four general categories: 1) taxa richness and composition, 2) pollution
tolerance and intolerance, 3) feeding ecology, and 4) population attributes. Metrics
marked with a (*) are included in the recommended suite of metrics in this manual. The
River Watch Network's Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Manual contains detailed
guidance on selecting, calculating, aggregating, and interpreting the metrics discussed
below. (See Dates, G. and J. Byrne in References and Further Reading)
Taxa Richness and Composition Metrics
• Total Number of Taxa *: the total number of taxa found in the sample.
• Number ofEPT Taxa *: the combined number of mayfly (E), stonefly (P) and
caddisfly (T) taxa found in the sample. The number of taxa in each of these
macroinvertebrate orders can also be reported separately since each order may
respond differently to various impacts.
-------
• Number of Long-Lived Taxa: the number of organism families found in the sample
(such as giant stoneflies and dobson flies) that live more than one season.
• Percent Abundance of the Major Groups *: the percent of the sample that is
comprised of individuals in each of the selected major groups (mostly orders).
• Percent Model Affinity (Bode, 1991): used in conjunction with Percent
Composition of the Major Groups, this metric measures the similarity of the
sample to a model "nonimpacted" community of organisms (adjusted for
ecoregional conditions) based on the percent composition of the major groups.
• Quantitative Similarity Index (from Shackleford, 1988): used in conjunction with
Percent Composition of the Major Groups, this metric shows the percent similarity
between two sites based on the percent of the sample in each of the major groups.
• Dominants in Common (from Shackleford, 1988): the number of dominant (5 most
abundant families) families common to two sites.
Tolerance and Intolerance Metrics
• Number of Intolerant Taxa: the number of taxa in the sample that are in the
10-15% of the least tolerant taxa in a region or that have a pollution tolerance value
of 1 (based on the Hilsenhoff scale of 0-10).
• Percent of Individuals in Tolerant Taxa: the number of taxa in the sample that are
in the 10-15% of the most tolerant taxa in a region or that have a pollution
tolerance value of 10 (based on the Hilsenhoff scale of 0-10).
• Number ofClinger Taxa: the number of families in the sample that live by clinging
to the bottom of the stream.
• Sensitive Taxa Index *: the pollution tolerance values (based on the Hilsenhoff
scale of 0-10) assigned to each family aggregated into an overall pollution
tolerance value for the sample.
Feeding Ecology Metrics
• Percent Composition of Functional Feeding Groups: the percentage of the total
number of individuals in the sample that belong to each of the five functional
feeding groups (scrapers, shredders, filtering collectors, gathering collectors, and
predators).
• Percent Abundance of Scrapers *: the percent of the total number of individuals in
the sample that use bottom-growing algae as their primary food source.
• Percent Abundance of Shredders *: the percent of the total number of individuals
in the sample that use leaves and other plant debris as their primary food source.
• Percent Abundance of Predators: the percent of the total number of individuals in
the sample that eat other animals as their primary food source.
Population Attributes Metrics
• Percent Dominance (of the most abundant family) *: the percentage of the total
number of individuals in the sample that are in the sample's most abundant family.
• Percent Dominance (of the three most abundant families): the percentage of the
-------
total number of individuals in the sample that are in the sample's three most
abundant families.
Organism Density Per Sample (total abundance): the total number of individuals
in the sample (calculated if a subsample is used).
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
vvEPA
Office of Water
United Stales
Environmental
fon
f'n>t4-i. f inn
home
Monitoring Water Quality
Figure 4.1
Back to Chapter 4 - Macroinvertebrates and Habitat
Insects
Crustaceans
Stoneflies (Order: Plecoptera)
Mayflies (Order:
Ephemeroptera)
Caddisflies (Order:
Trichoptera)
Dragonflies & Damselflies
(Order: Odonata)
\
Crayfish & Freshwater shrimp
(Order: Decapoda)
Scud (Order: Amphipoda)
Isopod (Order: Isopoda)
-------
Flies & Midgets (Order:
Diptera)
Water Bugs (Order: Hemiptera)
N :i
Dobsonfly (Order:
Megaloptera)
Beetles (Order: Coleoptera)
Snails
Mussels & Clams
Worms
Leeches
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Monitoring Water Quality
Figure 4.7
Back to Chapter 4.2 - Streamside Biosurvey
Back to Chapter 4.3 - Intensive Stream Biosurvey
Nets recommended in this manual
Kick net
D-frame net
For rocky-bottom stream sampling, a kick net of 590
um (a #30 mesh size) or 500 um (#35 mesh size) is
recommended. (Mesh size is usually measured in
microns, um. The higher the number, the coarser the
mesh.)
For muddy-bottom stream sampling, a long-handled
D-frame or dip net is recommended for reaching into
vegetation that grows along stream banks or is
attached to the stream bottom, and for sweeping up
macroinvertebrates dislodged from woody debris.
D-frame nets also come in different mesh sizes.
This manual recommends that volunteer programs purchase their macroinvertebrate sampling nets from
scientific supply houses to ensure a standard degree of net quality and known mesh size. Some supply
houses might sell the components of the net separately. Volunteer programs then buy the net material
commercially, supply their own handles, and build the nets using volunteer labor.
Many programs use coarser mesh than is recommended in this manual. Coarser mesh is generally less
expensive. However, smaller organisms can be lost throguh the mesh during sampling. If you are in doubt
as to what mesh size to use, consult your technical a dvisor. If possible~and especially if you want your
volunteer data to be used by state and local water managers-it is best to use nets of the same type and size
as those which water quality professionals use in your state.
Other types of commonly used nets
Metal frame net
Used by the River Watch Network for sampling both
rocky-bottom and muddy-bottom streams.
Surber Sampler
Used by professional monitoring programs, this
sampler delineates an exact stream bottom area to be
disturbed.
-------
Office of Wetlands. Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Office of Water
United Stales
Envifanroenlal PraSeclion Agency
f $"*,: I itfn
home
Monitoring Water Quality
Figure 4.9
Back to Chapter 4.2 - Streamside Biosurvey
Back to Chapter 4.3 - Intensive Stream Biosurvey
1. Approach the sample site from the
downstream end.
2. Position the net at a 45° angle with the
bottom tight against the substrate.
4. Distrub the substrate thoroughly with your
feet.
5. Remove the net with a forward scooping
motion.
Figure 4 Si
•ocean res
u . ,1 ii i
-------
3. Dislodge macroinvertebrates by rubbing
rocks thoroughly.
6. Flush out the net with clean stream water.
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
&EPA
Office of Water
United Slales
EnvlronnMAlal Prof«iien Agtncy
'tt 11" rxh vti
Monitoring Water Quality
Figure 4.12
Back to Section 4.2 - Streamside Biosurvey
MACRGiNVERTEBRATE COUNT
Identify the macrdrwertebrates in your sample and assign, ttiem letter codes based
on their abundance: R (rare} - 1-9 organisms; C (common) «10-39 orpnisms; and
D (dominant) * 100 plus organisms.
Group 1 Group II Group III
Sensitive Somewhat-Sensitive Tolerant
Witer pennyIsrvae
HeJf gram mites
Mayiy nyniphs
Gllled snails
Riffle beetle adull
Stonefly nymphs
Non net-spinning
caddis fly larvae
*(*) Beetle larvae
Qams
Crane fly larvae
^ (Q Crayfish
_____ Damstltty nyinphs
M) Scuds
Sowbugs
Fishfly lirvae
Alderfly larvae
(27) Met- spinning
caddis fly larvae
Aquatic worms
BJackfly larvie
Leeches
MWge larvae
Cf5« Snails
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Unll«d Stales
Environmental PraltcSien
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
\\' tilt* r
M. I inn
home
Tables 4.6 - 4.9
Back to Section 4.3 - Intensive Stream Biosurvey
Primary Metrics
No. of Taxa
No. of EPT Taxa
% Dominance
Sensitive Taxa
Index
Optional Metrics
% Abundance of
Scrapers
% Abundance of
Shredders
(M)
Monitored
Site Values
COLUMN SCORE
(Multiply no. of circled values by the
bio survey score)
TOTAL SCORE
(Sum all the column scores)
Biosurvey Score
(Circle the appropriate range for
each metric)
>15
>8
<34%
<4.8
^ J^ Q / Q
^>QO/
15-8
8-4
34-67%
4.8-6.4
18-10%
9-5%
<8
<4
>67%
>6.4
<10
<5%
Notes: If fewer than 60 individuals in the monitored site, don't calculate
metrics for any of the sites. Biosurvey scoring ranges determined for the
summer index period.
Primary Metrics
No. of Taxa
No. of EPT Taxa
% Dominance
(M)
Monitored
Site Values ,
Biosurvey Scon
(Circle the appropriate r
each metric)
4.6
for
k ;!
ange for f
^_^^_ for
^K^H
>19 19-10 <10
>7
<30%
7-4 <4
30-50% >50%
-------
Sensitive Taxa
Index
Optional Metrics
% Abundance of
EPT
% Abundance of
Midge Larvae
COLUMN SCORE
(Multiply no. of circled values by the
biosurvey score)
TOTAL SCORE
(Sum all the column scores)
<5.0
>39%
>24%
5.0-6.8
39-20%
24-60%
>6.8
<20
<60%
Notes: If fewer than 60 individuals in the monitored site, don't
calculate metrics for any of the sites. Biosurvey scoring ranges
determined for the summer index period.
Primary
Metrics
No. of Taxa
No. of EPT Taxa
% Dominance
Sensitive Taxa
Index
(M)
Monitored
Site Values
COLUMN SCORE
(Multiply no. of circled values by
the biosurvey score)
TOTAL SCORE
(Sum all the column scores)
Biosurvey Score
(Circle the appropriate range
for each metric)
>15 ^—j^—-
>8 ^—jj~—
<34% Y^4^6T%^
<4.8 4.8-6.4
6 9
<8
<4
>67%
>6.4
0
Biosurvey Score for this site
is 15
This site scores in the Fair
range, 9-15
''' , ? 't '"'.,'
!' , " I !','>,''<
Total Score
From
Metrics
Condition
„ ^
Category
.,, ., ,
Attributes
-------
>18-24
9-15
0-6
Good
Fair
Poor
Comparable to the best situation to
be expected within an ecoregion.
Balanced trophic structure.
Optimum community structure
(composition and dominance) for
stream size and habitat quality.
Community structure less than
expected. Composition (species
richness) and diversity lower than
expected due to loss of some
pollution-intolerant forms. Percent
contribution of tolerant forms
increased. Reduction in EPT
index.
Few species present. If high
denisities of organisms, then
dominated by one or two
polution-tolerant taxa.
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
jj* CQA
^O'^—•»»Envifonn»n1alPfofeelionAgsrKj1
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
Chapter 5
Water Quality Conditions
5.1 -Stream Flow 5.4-pH 5.8 - Total Solids
5.2 - Dissolved Oxygen and 5.5 - Turbidity 5.9 - Conductivity
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5.6 - Phosphorus 5.10 - Total Alkalinity
5.3 - Temperature 5.7 -Nitrates 5.11 - Fecal Bacteria
Quality Assurance, Quality Control, and Quality Assessment Measures
Water quality monitoring is defined here as the sampling and analysis of water constituents and conditions. These
may include:
• Introduced pollutants, such as pesticides, metals, and oil
• Constituents found naturally in water that can nevertheless be affected by human sources, such as dissolved
oxygen, bacteria, and nutrients
The magnitude of their effects can be influenced by properties such as pH and temperature. For example,
temperature influences the quantity of dissolved oxygen that water is able to contain, and pH affects the toxicity
of ammonia.
Volunteers, as well as state and local water quality professionals, have been monitoring water quality conditions
for many years. In fact, until the past decade or so (when biological monitoring protocols were developed and
began to take hold), water quality monitoring was generally considered the primary way of identifying water
pollution problems. Today, professional water quality specialists and volunteer program coordinators alike are
moving toward approaches that combine chemical, physical, and biological monitoring methods to achieve the
best picture of water quality conditions.
Water quality monitoring can be used for many purposes:
• To identify whether waters are meeting designated uses. All states have established specific criteria (limits
on pollutants) identifying what concentrations of chemical pollutants are allowable in their waters. When
chemical pollutants exceed maximum or minimum allowable concentrations, waters might no longer be
able to support the beneficial uses such as fishing, swimming, and drinking for which they have been
designated. Designated uses and the specific criteria that protect them (along with antidegradation
statements say waters should not be allowed to deteriorate below existing or anticipated uses) together form
water quality standards. State water quality professionals assess water quality by comparing the
concentrations of chemical pollutants found in streams to the criteria in the state's standards, and so judge
whether streams are meeting their designated uses.
Water quality monitoring, however, might be inadequate for determining whether aquatic life uses are
being met in a stream. While some constituents (such as dissolved oxygen and temperature) are important
to maintaining healthy fish and aquatic insect populations, other factors, such as the physical structure of
the stream and the condition of the habitat, play an equal or greater role. Biological monitoring methods
(see Chapter 4) are generally better suited to determining whether aquatic life is supported.
• To identify specific pollutants and sources of pollution. Water quality monitoring helps link sources of
pollution to a stream quality problem because it identifies specific problem pollutants. Since certain
-------
activities tend to generate certain pollutants (e.g., bacteria and nutrients are more likely to come from an
animal feedlot than an automotive repair shop), a tentative link might be made that would warrant further
investigation or monitoring.
• To determine trends. Chemical constituents that are properly monitored (i.e., consistent time of day and on
a regular basis, using consistent methods) can be analyzed for trends over time.
• To screen for impairment. Finding excessive levels of one or more chemical constituents can serve as an
early warning "screen" of potential pollution problems.
Designing a water quality monitoring program
The first step in designing a water quality monitoring program is to determine the purpose of the monitoring. This
will help you select which parameters to monitor. The program steering committee should make this decision
based on factors such as:
• Types of water quality problems and pollution sources that will likely be encountered (Table 5.1)
• Cost of available monitoring equipment
• Precision and accuracy of available monitoring equipment
• Capabilities of the volunteers
Source
Common Associated Chemical Pollutants
Cropland
Forestry harvest
Grazing land
Industrial discharge
Mining
Septic systems
Sewage treatment plants
Construction
Urban runoff
Turbidity, phosphorus, nitrates, temparature, total solids
Turbidity, temperature, total solids
Fecal bacteria, turbidity, phosphorus, nitrates, temperature
Temperature, conductivity, total solids, toxics, pH
pH, alkalinity, total dissolved solids
Fecal bacteria (i.e., Escherichia coli, enterococcis), nitrates,
phosphorus, dissolved oxygen/biochemical oxygen demand,
conductivity, temperature
Dissolved oxygen and biochemical oxygen demand, turbidity,
conductivity, phosphorus, nitrates, fecal bacteria, temperature, total
solids, pH
Turbidity, temperature, dissolved oxygen and biochemical oxygen
demand, total solids, and toxics
Turbidity, phosphorus, nitrates, temperature, conductivity, dissolved
oxygen and biochemical oxygen demand
associated
pollutants
A volunteer
water
quality
monitoring
program.
should be
geared to
the types of
watershed
uses
most often
encountered.
Because of the expense and difficulty involved, volunteers generally do not monitor for toxic substances such as
heavy metals and organic chemicals (e.g., pesticides, herbicides, solvents, and PCBs). They might, however,
collect water samples for analysis at accredited labs.
The parameters most commonly monitored by volunteers in streams are discussed in detail in this chapter. They
include stream flow, dissolved oxygen and biochemical oxygen demand, temperature, pH, turbidity, phosphorus,
nitrates, total solids, conductivity, total alkalinity, and fecal bacteria. Of these, the first five are the most basic and
should form the foundation of almost any volunteer water quality monitoring program.
Relatively inexpensive and simple-to-use kits are available from scientific supply houses to monitor these
pollutants. Many volunteer programs use these kits effectively. Meters and sophisticated lab equipment may be
more accurate, but they are also more expensive, less flexible (e.g., meters generally have to be read in the field),
and require periodic calibration. This chapter discusses specific equipment and sampling considerations for each
-------
parameter, and usually describes several approaches to monitor them. Table 5.2 lists methods available for
monitoring key parameters, including the preferred testing site (lab or field).
General preparation and sampling considerations
The sections that follow will detail specific sampling and equipment considerations and analytical procedures for
each of the most common water quality parameters. There are, however, two general tasks that are accomplished
anytime water samples are taken. These are discussed below.
Task 1 Preparation of Sampling Containers
Reused sample containers and glassware must be cleaned and rinsed before the first sampling run and after each
run by following either Method A or Method B described below. The most suitable method depends on the
parameter being measured.
Method A: General Preparation of Sampling Containers
The following method should be used when preparing all sample containers and glassware for monitoring
conductivity, total solids, turbidity, pH, and total alkalinity. Wear latex gloves!
1. Wash each sample bottle or piece of glassware with a brush and phosphate-free detergent.
2. Rinse three times with cold tap water.
3. Rinse three times with distilled or deionized water.
Method B: Acid Wash Procedure for Preparing Sampling Containers This method should be used when
preparing all sample containers and glassware for monitoring nitrates and phosphorus. Wear latex gloves!
1. Wash each sample bottle or piece of glassware with a brush and phosphate-free detergent.
2. Rinse three times with cold tap water.
3. Rinse with 10 percent hydrochloric acid.
4. Rinse three times with deionized water.
Task 2 Collecting Samples
In general, sample away from the streambank in the main current. Never sample stagnant water. The outside
curve of the stream is often a good place to sample, since the main current tends to hug this bank. In shallow
stretches, carefully wade into the center current to collect the sample.
A boat will be required for deep sites. Try to maneuver the boat into the center of the main current to collect the
water sample.
When collecting a water sample for analysis in the field or at the lab, follow the steps below. For Whirl-pak®
Bags
1. Label the bag with the site number, date, and time.
2. Tear off the top of the bag along the perforation
above the wire tab just prior to sampling (Fig.
5.1). Avoid touching the inside of the bag. If you
accidentally touch the inside of the bag, use
another one.
3. Wading. Try to disturb as little bottom sediment
as possible. In any case, be careful not to collect
water that contains bottom sediment. Stand
facing upstream. Collect the water sample in
front of you.
Boat. Carefully reach over the side and collect
the water sample on the upstream side of the
boat.
L
- Perforation
~ — Pull Tab
-------
4. Hold the two white pull tabs in each hand and "
lower the bag into the water on your upstream
side with the opening facing upstream. Open the - . •-.••,
bag midway between the surface and the bottom ' '' •'
by pulling the white pull tabs. The bag should
begin to fill with water. You may need to "scoop"
water into the bag by drawing it through the
water upstream and away from you. Fill the bag
no more than 3/4 full!
5. Lift the bag out of the water. Pour out excess water. Pull on the wire tabs to close the bag. Continue holding
the wire tabs and flip the bag over at least 4-5 times quickly to seal the bag. Don't try to squeeze the air out
of the top of the bag. Fold the ends of the wire tabs together at the top of the bag, being careful not to
puncture the bag. Twist them together, forming a loop.
6. Fill in the bag number and/or site number on the appropriate field data sheet. This is important! It is the
only way the lab coordinator know which bag goes with which site.
7. If samples are to be analyzed in a lab, place the sample in the cooler with ice or cold packs. Take all
samples to the lab.
For Screw-cap Bottles
To collect water samples using screw-cap sample bottles, use the following procedures (Fig. 5.2 and 5.3):
-------
1.
d-,.
t
2.
3.
1. Label the bottle with the site number, date, and time.
2. Remove the cap from the bottle just before sampling. Avoid touching the inside of the bottle or the cap. If
you accidentally touch the inside of the bottle, use another one.
3. Wading. Try to disturb as little bottom sediment as possible. In any case, be careful not to collect water that
has sediment from bottom disturbance. Stand facing upstream. Collect the water sample on your upstream
side, in front of you. You may also tape your bottle to an extension pole to sample from deeper water.
Boat. Carefully reach over the side and collect the water sample on the upstream side of the boat.
4. Hold the bottle near its base and plunge it (opening downward) below the water surface. If you are using an
extension pole, remove the cap, turn the bottle upside down, and plunge it into the water, facing upstream.
Collect a water sample 8 to 12 inches beneath the surface or mid-way between the surface and the bottom if
the stream reach is shallow.
5. Turn the bottle underwater into the current and away from you. In slow-moving stream reaches, push the
bottle underneath the surface and away from you in an upstream direction.
6. Leave a 1-inch air space (Except for DO and BOD samples). Do not fill the bottle completely (so that the
sample can be shaken just before analysis). Recap the bottle carefully, remembering not to touch the inside.
7. Fill in the bottle number and/or site number on the appropriate field data sheet. This is important because it
tells the lab coordinator which bottle goes with which site.
8. If the samples are to be analyzed in the lab, place them in the cooler for transport to the lab.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search I Comments
-------
i EnMlroninenlal Protection
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
QUALITY ASSURANCE, QUALITY CONTROL, and QUALITY ASSESSMENT
MEASURES
Back to Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions
Quality assurance/quality control measures are those activities you undertake to demonstrate the accuracy (how
close to the real result you are) and precision (how reproducible your results are) of your monitoring. Quality
Assurance (QA) generally refers to a broad plan for maintaining quality in all aspects of a program. This plan
should describe how you will undertake your monitoring effort: proper documentation of all your procedures,
training of volunteers, study design, data management and analysis, and specific quality control measures. Quality
Control (QC) consists of the steps you will take to determine the validity of specific sampling and analytical
procedures. Quality assessment is your assessment of the overall precision and accuracy of your data, after you've
run the analyses.
Quality Control and Assessment Measures: Internal Checks
Internal checks are performed by the project field volunteers, staff, and lab.
• Field Blanks. A trip blank (also known as a field blank) is deionized water which is treated as a sample. It
is used to identify errors or contamination in sample collection and analysis.
• Negative and Positive Plates (for bacteria). A negative plate results when the buffered rinse water (the
water used to rinse down the sides of the filter funnel during filtration) has been filtered the same way as a
sample. This is different from a field blank in that it contains reagents used in the rinse water. There should
be no bacteria growth on the filter after incubation. It is used to detect laboratory bacteria contamination of
the sample. Positive plates result when water known to contain bacteria (such as wastewater treatment plant
influent) is filtered the same way as a sample. There should be plenty of bacteria growth on the filter after
incubation. It is used to detect procedural errors or the presence of contaminants in the laboratory analysis
that might inhibit bacteria growth.
• Field Duplicates. A field duplicate is a duplicate river sample collected by the same team or by another
sampler or team at the same place, at the same time. It is used to estimate sampling and laboratory analysis
precision.
• Lab Replicates. A lab replicate is a sample that is split into subsamples at the lab. Each subsample is then
analyzed and the results compared. They are used to test the precision of the laboratory measurements. For
bacteria, they are used to obtain an optimal number of bacteria colonies on filters for counting purposes.
• Spike Samples. A known concentration of the indicator being measured is added to the sample. This should
increase the concentration in the sample by a predictable amount. It is used to test the accuracy of the
method.
• Calibration Blank. A calibration blank is deionized water processed like any of the samples and used to
"zero" the instrument. It is the first "sample" analyzed and used to set the meter to zero. This is different
from the field blank in that it is "sampled" in the lab. It is used to check the measuring instrument
periodically for "drift" (the instrument should always read "0" when this blank is measured). It can also be
compared to the field blank to pinpoint where contamination might have occurred.
• Calibration Standards. Calibration standards are used to calibrate a meter. They consist of one or more
"standard concentrations" (made up in the lab to specified concentrations) of the indicator being measured,
one of which is the calibration blank. Calibration standards can be used to calibrate the meter before
running the test, or they can be used to convert the units read on the meter to the reporting units (for
example, absorbance to milligrams per liter).
-------
Quality Control And Assessment Measures: External Checks
External checks are performed by nonvolunteer field staff and a lab (also known as a "quality control lab"). The
results are compared with those obtained by the project lab.
• External Field Duplicates. An external field duplicate is a duplicate river sample collected and processed
by an independent (e.g., professional) sampler or team at the same place at the same time as regular river
samples. It is used to estimate sampling and laboratory analysis precision.
• Split Samples. A split sample is a sample that is divided into two subsamples at the lab. One subsample is
analyzed at the project lab and the other is analyzed at an independent lab. The results are compared.
• Outside Lab Analysis of Duplicate Samples. Either internal or external field duplicates can be analyzed at
an independent lab. The results should be comparable with those obtained by the project lab.
• Knowns. The quality control lab sends samples for selected indicators, labeled with the concentrations, to
the project lab for analysis prior to the first sample run. These samples are analyzed and the results
compared with the known concentrations. Problems are reported to the quality control lab.
• Unknowns. The quality control lab sends samples to the project lab for analysis for selected indicators,
prior to the first sample run. The concentrations of these samples are unknown to the project lab. These
samples are analyzed and the results reported to the quality control lab. Discrepancies are reported to the
project lab and a problemidentification and solving process follows.
The table below shows the applicability of common quality control measures to the water quality indicators
covered in this manual.
Steps To Quality Control
1. Consult with your technical committee and/or program advisor to help you determine quality
assurance/quality control measures you will use to answer your questions and meet your data quality
requirements
2. Locate a quality control lab—an independent lab that can run external checks for you.
3. Determine which quality checks you have the resources and capabilities to carry out. Your human and
financial resources and expertise might limit the water quality indicators your can monitor.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 18th ed. American Public Health
Association, Washington, DC.
Intergovernmental Task Force on Monitoring Water Quality. 1994. Water quality monitoring in the United States.
1993 report and technical appendixes. Washington, DC.
Mattson, M. 1992. The basics of quality control. The Volunteer Monitor. 4(2) Fall 1992.
USEPA. 1983. Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes. EPA600/4 79020. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH. March.
USEPA. 1984. Guidance for preparation of combined work/quality assurance project plans for environmental
monitoring. ORWS QA1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards.
Washington DC, May.
USEPA. 1996. The Volunteer Monitor's Guide to Quality Assurance Project Plans. EPA841-B-96-003.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
Common Quality Control Measures
Dissolved„ . TTT ,-,•. ™ , ^T. . Total „ , .. .. Total Fecal
„ Temperature pH Turbidity Phosphorus Nitrates „ ,., Conductivity .„,. „ .
Internal Checks
Field
• • • • • •
blanks
Field
• ••• • •• • ••
duplicates
-------
Lab
•
replicates
Positive
plates
Negative
plates
Spike
samples
Calibration
blank
Calibration
standard
External Checks
External
field
duplicates
Split
samples
Outside lab
•
analysis
Verification
Knowns •
Unknowns •
a - using an oxygen-saturated sample
b - using subsamples of different sizes
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home | Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search I Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.1
Stream Flow
What is stream flow and why is it important?
Stream flow, or discharge, is the volume of water that moves over a designated point over
a fixed period of time. It is often expressed as cubic feet per second (ft3/sec).
The flow of a stream is directly related to the amount of water moving off the watershed
into the stream channel. It is affected by weather, increasing during rainstorms and
decreasing during dry periods. It also changes during different seasons of the year,
decreasing during the summer months when evaporation rates are high and shoreline
vegetation is actively growing and removing water from the ground. August and
September are usually the months of lowest flow for most streams and rivers in most of
the country.
Water withdrawals for irrigation purposes can seriously deplete water flow, as can
industrial water withdrawals. Dams used for electric power generation, particularly
facilities designed to produce power during periods of peak need, often block the flow of
a stream and later release it in a surge.
Flow is a function of water volume and velocity. It is important because of its impact on
water quality and on the living organisms and habitats in the stream. Large, swiftly
flowing rivers can receive pollution discharges and be little affected, whereas small
streams have less capacity to dilute and degrade wastes.
Stream velocity, which increases as the volume of the water in the stream increases,
determines the kinds of organisms that can live in the stream (some need fast-flowing
areas; others need quiet pools). It also affects the amount of silt and sediment carried by
the stream. Sediment introduced to quiet, slow-flowing streams will settle quickly to the
stream bottom. Fast moving streams will keep sediment suspended longer in the water
column. Lastly, fast-moving streams generally have higher levels of dissolved oxygen
than slow streams because they are better aerated.
This section describes one method for estimating flow in a specific area or reach of a
stream. It is adapted from techniques used by several volunteer monitoring programs and
-------
uses a float (an object such as an orange, ping-pong ball, pine cone, etc.) to measure
stream velocity. Calculating flow involves solving an equation that examines the
relationship among several variables including stream cross-sectional area, stream length,
and water velocity. One way to measure flow is to solve the following equation:
Flow = ALC / T
Where:
A = Average cross-sectional area of the stream (stream width multiplied by average
water depth).
L = Length of the stream reach measured (usually 20 ft.)
C = A coefficient or correction factor (0.8 for rocky-bottom streams or 0.9 for
muddy-bottom streams). This allows you to correct for the fact that water at the
surface travels faster than near the stream bottom due to resistance from gravel,
cobble, etc. Multiplying the surface velocity by a correction coefficient decreases
the value and gives a better measure of the stream's overall velocity.
T = Time, in seconds, for the float to travel the length of L
How to Measure and Calculate Stream Flow
Task 1 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, when measuring and
calculating flow, include the following equipment:
• Ball of heavy-duty string, four stakes, and a hammer to drive the stakes into the
ground. The string will be stretched across the width of the stream perpendicular to
shore at two locations. The stakes are to anchor the string on each bank to form a
transect line.
• Tape measure (at least 20 feet)
• Waterproof yardstick or other implement to measure water depth
• Twist ties (to mark off intervals on the string of the transect line)
• An orange and a fishing net (to scoop the orange out of the stream)
• Stopwatch (or watch with a second hand)
• Calculator (optional)
Task 2 Select a stretch of stream
The stream stretch chosen for the measurement of discharge should be straight (no
bends), at least 6 inches deep, and should not contain an area of slow water such as a
pool. Unobstructed riffles or runs are ideal. The length that you select will be equal to L
in solving the flow equation. Twenty feet is a standard length used by many programs.
Measure your length and mark the upper and lower end by running a transect line across
-------
the stream perpendicular to the
shore using the string and stakes
(Fig. 5.4). The string should be
taut and near the water surface.
The upstream transect is
Transect #1 and the downstream
one is Transect #2.
Task 3 Calculate the
average
cross-sectional area
Cross-sectional area (A in the
formula) is the product of
stream width multiplied by
average water depth. To
calculate the average
cross-sectional area for the
study stream reach, volunteers
should determine the ;. , , ,( ,
cross-sectional area for each
transect, add the results together, and then divide by 2 to determine the average
cross-sectional area for the stream reach.
To measure cross-sectional area:
Determine the average
depth along the transect
by marking off equal
intervals along the string
with the twist ties. The
intervals can be
one-fourth, one-half, and
three-fourths of the
distance across the
stream. Measure the
water's depth at each
interval point (Fig. 5.5).
To calculate average
depth for each transect,
divide the total of the
three depth measurements
by 4. (You divide by 4
instead of 3 because you
need to account for the 0
-------
depths that occur at the
shores.) In the example
shown in Figure 5.6, the
average depth of Transect
#1 is 0.575 feet and the
average depth of Transect
#2 is 0.625 feet.
2. Determine the width of each transect by measuring the distance from shoreline to
shoreline. Simply add together all the interval widths for each transect to determine
its width. In the Figure 5.6 example, the width of Transect #1 is 8 feet and the
width of Transect #2 is 10 feet.
3. Calculate the cross-sectional area of each transect by multiplying width times
average depth. The example given in Figure 5.6 shows that the average
cross-sectional area of Transect #1 is 4.60 square feet and the average
cross-sectional area of Transect #2 is 6.25 square feet.
4. To determine the average cross-sectional area of the entire stream reach (A in the
formula), add together the average cross-sectional area of each transect and then
divide by 2. The average cross-sectional area for the stream reach in Figure 5.6 is
5.42 square feet.
Task 4 Measure travel time
Volunteers should time with a stopwatch how long it takes for an orange (or some other
object) to float from the upstream to the downstream transect. An orange is a good object
to use because it has enough buoyancy to float just below the water surface. It is at this
position that maximum velocity typically occurs.
The volunteer who lets the orange go at the upstream transect should position it so it
flows into the fastest current. The clock stops when the orange passes fully under the
downstream transect line. Once under the transect line, the orange can be scooped out of
the water with the fishing net. This "time of travel" measurement should be conducted at
least three times and the results averaged~the more trials you do, the more accurate your
results will be. The averaged results are equal to Tin the formula. It is a good idea to
float the orange at different distances from the bank to get various velocity estimates.
You should discard any float trials if the object gets hung up in the stream (by cobbles,
roots, debris, etc.)
Task 5 Calculate flow
Recall that flow can be calculated using the equation:
Flow = ALC / T
Continuing the example in Fig. 5.6. say the average time of travel for the orange between
Transect #1 and #2 is 15 seconds and the stream had a rocky bottom. The calculation of
-------
flow would be:
Where:
A = 5.42 ft2
L = 20ft
C =0.8 (coefficient for a rocky-bottom stream)
T =15 seconds
Flow = 15 seconds (5.42 ft2) (20 ft) (0.8) /15 sec.
Flow = 86.72 ft3/15 sec.
Flow = 5.78ft3/sec.
Task 6 Record flow on the data form
On the following page is a form volunteers can use to calculate flow of a stream.
References
Adopt-A-Stream Foundation. Field Guide: Watershed Inventory and Stream Monitoring
Methods, by Tom Murdoch and Martha Cheo. 1996. Everett, WA.
Mitchell, M.K., and W. Stapp. Field Manual for Water Quality Monitoring. 5th Edition.
Thompson Shore Printers.
Missouri Stream Teams. Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring. Missouri Department of
Natural Resources, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102.
Data Form for Calculating Flow (PDF, 82.8 KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe
Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is
also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Office of Water
United Stales
EnwIrarwnSfilai Protection Agency
Monitoring Water Quality
5.2
Dissolved Oxygen and Biochemical Oxygen Demand
What is dissolved oxygen and why is it important?
The stream system both produces and consumes oxygen. It gains oxygen from the atmosphere and from plants as
a result of photosynthesis. Running water, because of its churning, dissolves more oxygen than still water, such as
that in a reservoir behind a dam. Respiration by aquatic animals, decomposition, and various chemical reactions
consume oxygen.
Wastewater from sewage treatment plants often contains organic materials that are decomposed by
microorganisms, which use oxygen in the process. (The amount of oxygen consumed by these organisms in
breaking down the waste is known as the biochemical oxygen demand or BOD. A discussion of BOD and how to
monitor it is included at the end of this section.) Other sources of oxygen-consuming waste include stormwater
runoff from farmland or urban streets, feedlots, and failing septic systems.
Oxygen is measured in its dissolved form as dissolved oxygen (DO). If more oxygen is consumed than is
produced, dissolved oxygen levels decline and some sensitive animals may move away, weaken, or die.
DO levels fluctuate seasonally and over a 24-hour period. They vary with water temperature and altitude. Cold
water holds more oxygen than warm water (Table 5.3) and water holds less oxygen at higher altitudes. Thermal
discharges, such as water used to cool machinery in a manufacturing plant or a power plant, raise the temperature
of water and lower its oxygen content. Aquatic animals are most vulnerable to lowered DO levels in the early
morning on hot summer days when stream flows are low, water temperatures are high, and aquatic plants have
not been producing oxygen since sunset.
Sampling and Equipment
Considerations
In contrast to lakes, where DO levels are most likely to
vary vertically in the water column, the DO in rivers and
streams changes more horizontally along the course of
the waterway. This is especially true in smaller,
shallower streams. In larger, deeper rivers, some vertical
stratification of dissolved oxygen might occur. The DO
levels in and below riffle areas, waterfalls, or dam
spillways are typically higher than those in pools and
slower-moving stretches. If you wanted to measure the
effect of a dam, it would be important to sample for DO
behind the dam, immediately below the spillway, and
upstream of the dam. Since DO levels are critical to fish,
a good place to sample is in the pools that fish tend to
favor or in the spawning areas they use.
An hourly time profile of DO levels at a sampling site is
a valuable set of data because it shows the change in DO
levels from the low point just before sunrise to the high
Temperature DO Temperature DO
(°C) (mg/1) (°C) (mg/1)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
14.60
14.19
13.81
13.44
13.09
12.75
12.43
12.12
11.83
11.55
11.27
11.01
10.76
10.52
10.29
10.07
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
8.56
8.40
8.24
8.09
7.95
7.81
7.67
7.54
7.41
7.28
7.16
7.16
6.93
6.82
6.71
6.61
Table 5.3
dissolved
oxygen
concentrates
vary with
temperature
-------
point sometime in the midday. However, this might not j [g j 9 g^ j 39 j g 5^
be practical for a volunteer monitoring program. It is p= Q ,, ^m , .,
important to note the time of your DO sampling to help L
judge when in the daily cycle the data were collected. I ' • ' 16.41
| 19 | 9.26 | 42 | 6.22
DO is measured either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or i TO 1 Q n? I 43 1 6 13
"percent saturation." Milligrams per liter is the amount of L
oxygen in a liter of water. Percent saturation is the j ' '
amount of oxygen in a liter of water relative to the total | 22 | 8.72 | 45 | 5.95
amount of oxygen that the water can hold at that temperature.
DO samples are collected using a special BOD bottle: a glass bottle with a "turtleneck" and a ground glass
stopper. You can fill the bottle directly in the stream if the stream is wadable or beatable, or you can use a
sampler that is dropped from a bridge or boat into water deep enough to submerse the sampler. Samplers can be
made or purchased. Dissolved oxygen is measured primarily either by using some variation of the Winkler
method or by using a meter and probe. Winkler Method The Winkler method involves filling a sample bottle
completely with water (no air is left to bias the test). The dissolved oxygen is then "fixed" using a series of
reagents that form an acid compound that is titrated. Titration involves the drop-by-drop addition of a reagent that
neutralizes the acid compound and causes a change in the color of the solution. The point at which the color
changes is the "endpoint" and is equivalent to the amount of oxygen dissolved in the sample. The sample is
usually fixed and titrated in the field at the sample site. It is possible, however, to prepare the sample in the field
and deliver it to a lab for titration.
Dissolved oxygen field kits using the Winkler method are relatively inexpensive, especially compared to a meter
and probe. Field kits run between $35 and $200, and each kit comes with enough reagents to run 50 to 100 DO
tests. Replacement reagents are inexpensive, and you can buy them already measured out for each test in plastic
pillows.
You can also buy the reagents in larger quantities, in bottles, and measure them out with a volumetric scoop. The
advantage of the pillows is that they have a longer shelf life and are much less prone to contamination or spillage.
The advantage of buying larger quantities in bottles is that the cost per test is considerably less.
The major factor in the expense of the kits is the method of titration they use eyedropper, syringe-type titrator, or
digital titrator. Eyedropper and syringe-type titration is less precise than digital titration because a larger drop of
titrant is allowed to pass through the dropper opening and, on a micro-scale, the drop size (and thus the volume of
titrant) can vary from drop to drop. A digital titrator or a buret (which is a long glass tube with a tapered tip like a
pipet) permits much more precision and uniformity in the amount of titrant that is allowed to pass.
If your program requires a high degree of accuracy and precision in DO results, use a digital titrator. A kit that
uses an eye dropper-type or syringe- type titrator is suitable for most other purposes. The lower cost of this type
of DO field kit might be attractive if you are relying on several teams of volunteers to sample multiple sites at the
same time.
Meter and Probe
A dissolved oxygen meter is an electronic device that converts signals from a probe that is placed in the water
into units of DO in milligrams per liter. Most meters and probes also measure temperature. The probe is filled
with a salt solution and has a selectively permeable membrane that allows DO to pass from the stream water into
the salt solution. The DO that has diffused into the salt solution changes the electric potential of the salt solution
and this change is sent by electric cable to the meter, which converts the signal to milligrams per liter on a scale
that the volunteer can read.
DO meters are expensive compared to field kits that use the titration method. Meter/probe combinations run
between $500 and $1,200, including a long cable to connect the probe to the meter. The advantage of a
meter/probe is that you can measure DO and temperature quickly at any point in the stream that you can reach
with the probe. You can also measure the DO levels at a certain point on a continuous basis. The results are read
directly as milligrams per liter, unlike the titration methods, in which the final titration result might have to be
converted by an equation to milligrams per liter.
-------
However, DO meters are more fragile than field kits, and repairs to a damaged meter can be costly. The
meter/probe must be carefully maintained, and it must be calibrated before each sample run and, if you are doing
many tests, in between samplings. Because of the expense, a volunteer program might have only one meter/probe.
This means that only one team of samplers can sample DO and they will have to do all the sites. With field kits,
on the other hand, several teams can sample simultaneously.
Laboratory Testing of Dissolved Oxygen
If you use a meter and probe, you must do the testing in the field; dissolved oxygen levels in a sample bottle
change quickly due to the decomposition of organic material by microorganisms or the production of oxygen by
algae and other plants in the sample. This will lower your DO reading. If you are using a variation of the Winkler
method, it is possible to "fix" the sample in the field and then deliver it to a lab for titration. This might be
preferable if you are sampling under adverse conditions or if you want to reduce the time spent collecting
samples. It is also a little easier to titrate samples in the lab, and more quality control is possible because the same
person can do all the titrations.
How to collect and analyze samples
The procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for dissolved oxygen consist of the following tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and time, safety
considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In addition to the standard sampling
equipment and apparel, when sampling for dissolved oxygen, include the following equipment:
If Using the Winkler Method
• Labels for sample bottles
• Field kit and instructions for DO testing
• Enough reagents for the number of sites to be tested
• Kemmerer, Van Dorn, or home-made sampler to collect deep-water samples
• A numbered glass BOD bottle with a glass stopper (1 for each site)
• Data sheet for dissolved oxygen to record results
If Using a Meter and Probe
• DO meter and probe (electrode) (NOTE: Confirm that the meter has been calibrated according to the
manufacturer's instructions.)
• Operating manual for the meter and probe
• Extra membranes and electrolyte solution for the probe
• Extra batteries for the meter
• Extension pole
• Data sheet for dissolved oxygen to record results
TASK 2 Confirm that you are at the proper location
The directions for sampling should provide specific information about the exact point in the stream from which
you are to sample; e.g., "approximately 6 feet out from the large boulder downstream from the west side of the
bridge." If you are not sure you are in the exact spot, record a detailed description of where you took the sample
so that it can be compared to the actual site later.
-------
TASK 3 Collect samples and fill out the field data sheet
Winkler Method
Use a BOD bottle to collect the water sample. The most common sizes are 300 milliliters (mL) and 60 mL. Be
sure that you are using the correct volume for the titration method that will be used to determine the amount of
DO. There is usually a white label area on the bottle, and this may already be numbered. If so, be sure to record
that number on the field data sheet. If your bottle is not already numbered, place a label on the bottle (not on the
cap because a cap can be inadvertently placed on a different bottle) and use a waterproof marker to write in the
site number.
If you are collecting duplicate samples, label the duplicate bottle with the correct code, which should be
determined prior to sampling by the lab supplying the bottles. Use the following procedure for collecting a
sample for titration by the Winkler method:
1. Remember that the water sample must be collected in such a way that you can cap the bottle while it is still
submerged. That means that you must be able to reach into the water with both arms and the water must be
deeper than the sample bottle.
2. Carefully wade into the stream. Stand so that you are facing one of the banks.
3. Collect the sample so that you are not standing upstream of the bottle. Remove the cap of the BOD bottle.
Slowly lower the bottle into the water, pointing it downstream, until the lower lip of the opening is just
submerged. Allow the water to fill the bottle very gradually, avoiding any turbulence (which would add
oxygen to the sample). When the water level in the bottle has stabilized (it won't be full because the bottle
is tilted), slowly turn the bottle upright and fill it completely. Keep the bottle under water and allow it to
overflow for 2 or 3 minutes to ensure that no air bubbles are trapped.
4. Cap the bottle while it is still submerged. Lift it out of the water and look around the "collar" of the bottle
just below the bottom of the stopper. If you see an air bubble, pour out the sample and try again.
5. "Fix" the sample immediately following the directions in your kit:
o Remove the stopper and add the fixing reagents to the sample.
O Immediately insert the stopper so air is not trapped in the bottle and invert several times to mix. This
solution is caustic. Rinse your hands if you get any solution on them. An orange-brown flocculent
precipitate will form if oxygen is present.
o Wait a few minutes until the floe in the solution has settled. Again invert the bottle several times and
wait until the floe has settled. This ensures complete reaction of the sample and reagents. The sample
is now fixed, and atmospheric oxygen can no longer affect it. If you are taking the sample to the lab
for titration, no further action is necessary. You can store the sample in a cooler for up to 8 hours
before titrating it in a lab. If you are titrating the sample in the field, see Task 4: Analyze the
Samples.
-------
Using a DO Meter
If you are using a dissolved oxygen meter, be sure that it is calibrated immediately prior to use. Check the cable
connection between the probe and the meter. Make sure that the probe is filled with electrolyte solution, that the
membrane has no wrinkles, and that there are no bubbles trapped on the face of the membrane. You can do a field
check of the meter's accuracy by calibrating it in saturated air according to th e manufacturer's instructions. Or,
you can measure a water sample that is saturated with oxygen, as follows. (NOTE: You can also use this
procedure for testing the accuracy of the Winkler method.)
1. Fill a 1-liter beaker or bucket of tap water. (You may want to bring a gallon jug with water in it for this
purpose.) Mark the bottle number as "tap" on the lab sheet.
2. Pour this water back and forth into another beaker 10 times to saturate the water with oxygen.
3. Use the meter to measure the water temperature and record it in the water temperature column on the field
data sheet.
4. Find the water temperature of your "tap" sample in Table 5.3. Use the meter to compare the dissolved
oxygen concentration of your sample with the maximum concentration at that temperature in the table.
Your sample should be within 0.5 mg/L. If it is not, repeat the check and if there is still an error, check the
meter's batteries and follow the troubleshooting procedures in the manufacturer's manual.
Once the meter is turned on, allow 15 minute equilibration before calibrating. After calibration, do not turn the
meter off until the sample is analyzed. Once you have verified that the meter is working properly, you are ready
to measure the DO levels at the sampling site. You might need an extension pole (this can be as simple as a piece
of wood) to get the probe to the proper sampling point. Simply secure the probe to the end of the extension pole.
A golfer's ball retriever works well because it is collapsible and easy to transport. To use the probe, proceed as
follows:
1. Place the probe in the stream below the surface.
2. Set the meter to measure temperature, and allow the temperature reading to stabilize. Record the
temperature on the field data sheet.
-------
3. Switch the meter to read dissolved oxygen.
4. Record the dissolved oxygen level on the field data sheet.
TASK 4 Analyze the samples
Three types of titration apparatus can be used with the Winkler method: droppers, digital titrators, and burets. The
dropper and digital titrator are suited for field use. The buret is more conveniently used in the lab (Fig. 5.8)
Volunteer programs are most likely to use the dropper or digital titrator. For titration with a dropper or syringe,
which is relatively simple, follow the manufacturer's instructions. The following procedure is for using a digital
titrator to determine the quantity of dissolved oxygen in a fixed sample:
1. Select a sample volume and sodium thiosulfate titration cartridge for
the digital titrator corresponding to the expected dissolved oxygen
concentration according to Table 5.4. In most cases, you will use the
0.2 N cartridge and the 100-mL sample volume.
2. Insert a clean delivery tube into the titration cartridge.
3. Attach the cartridge to the titrator body.
4. Hold the titrator with the cartridge tip up. Turn the delivery knob to
eject air and a few drops of titrant. Reset the counter to 0 and wipe the
tip.
5. Use a graduated cylinder to measure the sample volume (from the
"fixed" sample in the 300-mL BOD bottle) according to Table 5.4.
6. Transfer the sample into a 250-mL Erlenmeyer flask, and place the
flask on a magnetic stirrer with a stir bar. If you are in the field, you can
manually swirl the flask to mix.
7. Place the delivery tube tip into the solution and turn the stirrer on to stir
the sample while you're turning the delivery knob.
8. Titrate to a pale yellow color.
9. Add two dropperfuls of starch indicator solution and swirl to mix. A
strong blue color will develop.
10. Continue to titrate until the sample is clear. Record the number of digits
required. (The color might reappear after standing a few minutes, but
this is not a cause for concern. The "first" disappearance of the blue
color is considered the endpoint.)
11. Calculate mg/L of DO = digits required X digit multiplier (from Table
5.4).
12. Record the results in the appropriate column of the data sheet.
Some water quality standards are expressed in terms of percent saturation. To
calculate percent saturation of the sample:
1. Find the temperature of your water sample as measured in the field.
2. Find the maximum concentration of your sample at that temperature as
given in Table 5.3.
3. Calculate the percent saturation, by dividing your actual dissolved
oxygen by the maximum concentration at the sample temperature.
4. Record the percent saturation in the appropriate column on the data
sheet.
TASK 5 Return the samples and the
field data sheets to the lab/drop-off
point
Expected Sample Titration Digit
Range Volume Cartridge Multiplier
1-5
mg/L
200 mL
0.2 N
0.01
T;
-------
2-10
mg/L
10+
mg/L
100 mL
200 mL
0.2 N
2.0 N
0.02
0.10
corresponding
for
Winkler
titration
If you are using the Winkler method and delivering the
samples to a lab for titration, double-check to make sure
that you have recorded the necessary information for
each site on the field data sheet, especially the bottle
number and corresponding site nu mber and the times
the samples were collected. Deliver your samples and field data sheets to the lab. If you have already obtained the
dissolved oxygen results in the field, send the data sheets to your sampling coordinator.
What is biochemical oxygen demand and why is it important?
Biochemical oxygen demand, or BOD, measures the amount of oxygen consumed by microorganisms in
decomposing organic matter in stream water. BOD also measures the chemical oxidation of inorganic matter (i.e.,
the extraction of oxygen from water via chemical reaction). A test is used to measure the amount of oxygen
consumed by these organisms during a specified period of time (usually 5 days at 20 C). The rate of oxygen
consumption in a stream is affected by a number of variables: temperature, pH, the presence of certain kinds of
microorganisms, and the type of organic and inorganic material in the water.
BOD directly affects the amount of dissolved oxygen in rivers and streams. The greater the BOD, the more
rapidly oxygen is depleted in the stream. This means less oxygen is available to higher forms of aquatic life. The
consequences of high BOD are the same as those for low dissolved oxygen: aquatic organisms become stressed,
suffocate, and die.
Sources of BOD include leaves and woody debris; dead plants and animals; animal manure; effluents from pulp
and paper mills, wastewater treatment plants, feedlots, and food-processing plants; failing septic systems; and
urban stormwater runoff.
Sampling Considerations
BOD is affected by the same factors that affect dissolved oxygen (see above). Aeration of stream water by rapids
and waterfalls, for example will accelerate the decomposition of organic and inorganic material. Therefore, BOD
levels at a sampling site with slower, deeper waters might be higher for a given volume of organic and inorganic
material than the levels for a similar site in highly aerated waters.
Chlorine can also affect BOD measurement by inhibiting or killing the microorganisms that decompose the
organic and inorganic matter in a sample. If you are sampling in chlorinated waters, such as those below the
effluent from a sewage treatment plant, it is necessary to neutralize the chlorine with sodium thiosulfate. (See
APHA, 1992.)
BOD measurement requires taking two samples at each site. One is tested immediately for dissolved oxygen, and
the second is incubated in the dark at 20 C for 5 days and then tested for the amount of dissolved oxygen
remaining. The difference in oxygen levels between the first test and the second test, in milligrams per liter
(mg/L), is the amount of BOD. This represents the amount of oxygen consumed by microorganisms to break
down the organic matter present in the sample bottle during the incubation period. Because of the 5-day
incubation, the tests should be conducted in a laboratory.
Sometimes by the end of the 5-day incubation period the dissolved oxygen level is zero. This is especially true for
rivers and streams with a lot of organic pollution. Since it is not known when the zero point was reached, it is not
possible to tell what the BOD level is. In this case it is necessary to dilute the original sample by a factor that
results in a final dissolved oxygen level of at least 2 mg/L. Special dilution water should be used for the dilutions.
(See APHA, 1992.)
It takes some experimentation to determine the appropriate dilution factor for a particular sampling site. The final
result is the difference in dissolved oxygen between the first measurement and the second after multiplying the
second result by the dilution factor. More details are provided in the following section.
-------
How to Collect and Analyze Samples
The procedures for collecting samples for BOD testing consist of the same steps described for sampling for
dissolved oxygen (see above), with one important difference. At each site a second sample is collected in a BOD
bottle and delivered to the lab for DO testing after the 5-day incubation period. Follow the same steps used for
measuring dissolved oxygen with these additional considerations:
• Make sure you have two BOD bottles for each site you will sample. The bottles should be black to prevent
photosynthesis. You can wrap a clear bottle with black electrician's tape if you do not have a bottle with
black or brown glass.
• Label the second bottle (the one to be incubated) clearly so that it will not be mistaken for the first bottle.
• Be sure to record the information for the second bottle on the field data sheet.
The first bottle should be analyzed just prior to storing the second sample bottle in the dark for 5 days at 20 C.
After this time, the second bottle is tested for dissolved oxygen using the same method that was used for the first
bottle. The BOD i s expressed in milligrams per liter of DO using the following equation:
DO (mg/L) of first bottle
- DO (mg/L) of second bottle
= BOD (mg/L)
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water andwastewater. 18th ed. American Public Health
Association, Washington, DC.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
United
Environmental Protection
IVrrl JT.
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
t'r4tl4't. I iun
home
5.3
Temperature
Why is temperature important?
The rates of biological and chemical processes depend on temperature. Aquatic
organisms from microbes to fish are dependent on certain temperature ranges for their
optimal health. Optimal temperatures for fish depend on the species: some survive best in
colder water, whereas others prefer warmer water. Benthic macroinvertebrates are also
sensitive to temperature and will move in the stream to find their optimal temperature. If
temperatures are outside this optimal range for a prolonged period of time, organisms are
stressed and can die. Temperature is measured in de-grees Fahrenheit (F) or degrees
Celsius (C).
For fish, there are two kinds of limiting temperatures the maximum temperature for short
exposures and a weekly average temperature that varies according to the time of year and
the life cycle stage of the fish species. Reproductive stages (spawning and embryo
development) are the most sensitive stages. Table 5.5 provides temperature criteria for
some species.
Temperature
affects the
oxygen content
of the water
(oxygen levels
become lower as
temperature
increases); the
rate of
photosynthesis
by aquatic
plants; the
metabolic rates
of aquatic
organisms; and
the sensitivity of
Max
Max
Max.
weekly temp, for weekly
Max.
5.5
Species
average survival
temp, for of short
growth exposure
(juveniles) (juveniles)
vv ^^jvi y f.
temp. tor
average ^
~ embryo
temp, tor
*•
-------
organisms to
toxic wastes,
parasites, and
diseases.
Causes of
temperature
change include
weather,
removal of
shading
streambank
vegetation,
impoundments
(a body of water
confined by a
barrier, such as a
dam), dis-charge
of cooling water,
Channel
catfish
Largemouth
bass
Rainbow
trout
Smallmouth
bass
Sockeye
salmon
32 °C (90
°F)
32 °C (90
°F)
19 °C (66
oF)
29 °C (84
oF)
18°C(64
oF)
35 °C (95
oF)
34 °C (93
oF)
24 °C (75
oF)
—
22 °C (72
oF)
27 °C
(81 °F)
21 °C
(70 °F)
9 °C (48
oF)
17 °C
(63 °F)
10 °C
(50 °F)
29 °C
(84 °F)
27 °C
(81 °F)
13 °C
(55 °F)
23 °C
(73 °F)
13 °C
(55 °F)
a - Optimum or mean of the range of spawning
temperatures reported for the species
b - Upper temperature for successful incubation and
hatching reported for the species
c - Upper temperature for spawning
(Brungs and Jones 1977)
urban storm water, and groundwater inflows to the stream.
Sampling and Equipment Considerations
Temperature in a stream will vary with width and depth. It can be significantly different
in the shaded portion of the water on a sunny day. In a small stream, the temperature will
be relatively constant as long as the stream is uniformly in sun or shade. In a large
stream, temperature can vary considerably with width and depth regardless of shade. If it
is safe to do so, temperature measurements should be collected at varying depths and
across the surface of the stream to obtain vertical and horizontal temperature profiles.
This can be done at each site at least once to determine the necessity of collecting a
profile during each sampling visit. Temperature should be measured at the same place
every time.
Temperature is measured in the stream with a thermometer or a meter. Alcohol-filled
thermometers are preferred over mercury-filled because they are less hazardous if broken.
Armored thermometers for field use can withstand more abuse than unprotected glass
thermometers and are worth the additional expense. Meters for other tests, such as pH
(acidity) or dissolved oxygen, also measure temperature and can be used instead of a
thermometer.
How to sample
The procedures for measuring temperature consist of the following tasks.
-------
TASK 1 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, when measuring temperature
you will need:
• A thermometer or meter
• A data sheet for temperature to record results
Be sure to let someone know where you are going and when you expect to return
TASK 2 Measure the temperature
In general, sample away from the streambank in the main current. The outside curve of
the stream is often a good place to sample since the main current tends to hug this bank.
In shallow stretches, wade into the center current carefully to measure temperature. If
wading is not possible, tape your thermometer to an extension pole or use a boat. Reach
out from the shore or boat as far as safely possible. If you use an extension pole, read the
temperature quickly before it changes to the air temperature.
If you are doing a horizontal or vertical temperature profile, make sure you can safely
reach all the points where a measurement is required before trying.
Measure temperature as follows:
1. Place the thermometer or meter probe in the water as least 4 inches below the
surface or halfway to the bottom if in a shallow stream.
2. If using a thermometer, allow enough time for it to reach a stable temperature (at
least 1 minute). If using a meter, allow the temperature reading to stabilize at a
constant temperature reading.
3. If possible, try to read the temperature with the thermometer bulb beneath the
water surface. If it is not possible, quickly remove the thermometer and read the
temperature.
4. Record the temperature on the field data sheet.
TASK 3 Return the field data sheets to the lab/dropoff
point.
References
Brungs, W.S. andB.R. Jones. 1977. temperature Criteria for Freshwater Fish:
Protocols and Procedures. EPA-600/3-77-061. Environ. Research Lab, Ecological
Resources Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Duluth, MN.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
United SI ales
Environmental Protection Agency
Quality
5.4
PH
What Is pH and why is it important?
pH is a term used to indicate the alkalinity or acidity of a substance as ranked on a scale from 1.0 to 14.0. Acidity
increases as the pH gets lower. Fig. 5.9 present the pH of some common liquids.
NEUIRAL
I II I
11 12 11 14
I I I
urine pure
water
blood
household
ammonia
IM
NaOH
pH affects many chemical and biological processes in the water. For example, different organisms flourish within
different ranges of pH. The largest variety of aquatic animals prefer a range of 6.5-8.0. pH outside this range
reduces the diversity in the stream because it stresses the physiological systems of most organisms and can reduce
reproduction. Low pH can also allow toxic elements and compounds to become mobile and "available" for uptake
by aquatic plants and animals. This can produce conditions that are toxic to aquatic life, particularly to sensitive
species like rainbow trout. Changes in acidity can be caused by atmospheric deposition (acid rain), surrounding
rock, and certain wastewater discharges.
The pH scale measures the logarithmic concentration of hydrogen (H+) and hydroxide (OH-) ions, which make
up water (H+ + OH- = H2O). When both types of ions are in equal concentration, the pH is 7.0 or neutral. Below
7.0, the water is acidic (there are more hydrogen ions than hydroxide ions). When the pH is above 7.0, the water
is alkaline, or basic (there are more hydroxide ions than hydrogen ions). Since the scale is logarithmic, a drop in
the pH by 1.0 unit is equivalent to a 10-fold increase in acidity. So, a water sample with a pH of 5.0 is 10 times as
acidic as one with a pH of 6.0, and pH 4.0 is 100 times as acidic as pH 6.0.
Analytical and equipment considerations
pH can be analyzed in the field or in the lab. If it is analyzed in the lab, you must measure the pH within 2 hours
of the sample collection. This is because the pH will change due to the carbon dioxide from the air dissolving in
-------
the water, which will bring the pH toward 7. If your program requires a high degree of accuracy and precision in
pH results, the pH should be measured with a laboratory quality pH meter and electrode. Meters of this quality
range in cost from around $250 to $1,000. Color comparators and pH "pocket pals" are suitable for most other
purposes. The cost of either of these is in the $50 range. The lower cost of the alternatives might be attractive if
you are relying on several teams of volunteers sampling multiple sites at the same time.
pH Meters
A pH meter measures the electric potential (millivolts) across an electrode when immersed in water. This electric
potential is a function of the hydrogen ion activity in the sample. Therefore, pH meters can display results in
either millivolts (mV) or pH units.
A pH meter consists of a potentiometer, which measures electric current; a glass electrode, which senses the
electric potential where it meets the water sample; a reference electrode, which provides a constant electric
potential; and a temperature compensating device, which adjusts the readings according to the temperature of the
sample (since pH varies with temperature). The reference and glass electrodes are frequently combined into a
single probe called a combination electrode.
There is a wide variety of meters, but the most important part of the pH meter is the electrode. Buy a good,
reliable electrode and follow the manufacturer's instructions for proper maintenance. Infrequently used or
improperly maintained electrodes are subject to corrosion, which makes them highly inaccurate.
pH "Pocket Pals" and Color Comparators
pH "pocket pals" are electronic hand-held "pens" that are dipped in the water and provide a digital readout of the
pH. They can be calibrated to one pH buffer (lab meters, on the other hand, can be calibrated to two or more
buffer solutions and thus are more accurate over a wide range of pH measurements).
Color comparators involve adding a reagent to the sample that colors the sample water. The intensity of the color
is proportional to the pH of the sample. This color is then matched against a standard color chart. The color chart
equates particular colors to associated pH values. The pH can be determined by matching the colors from the
chart to the color of the sample.
How to collect and analyze samples
The field procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for pH consist of the following tasks.
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
Sample containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be cleaned and rinsed before the first run and
after each sampling run by following the procedure described under Method A on page 128. Remember to wear
latex gloves.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to Section 2.3 - Saftey Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and time, picking up and
checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In addition to the standard sampling equipment and
apparel, when sampling for pH, include the following equipment:
• pH meter with combination temperature and reference electrode, or pH "pocket pal" or color comparator
• Wash bottle with deionized water to rinse pH meter electrode (if appropriate)
• Data sheet for pH to record results
Before you leave for the sampling site, be sure to calibrate the pH meter or "pocket pal." The pH meter and
"pocket pal" should be calibrated prior to sample analysis and after every 25 samples according to the instructions
that come with them.
If you are using a "pocket pal," use the buffer recommended by the manufacturer. If you are using a laboratory
grade meter, use two pH standard buffer solutions: 4.01 and 7.0. (Buffers can be purchased from test kit supply
-------
companies, such as Hach or LaMotte.) Following are notes regarding buffers.
• The buffer solutions should be at room temperature when you calibrate the meter.
• Do not use a buffer after its expiration date.
• Always cap the buffers during storage to prevent contamination.
• Because buffer pH values change with temperature, the meter must have a built-in temperature sensor that
automatically standardizes the pH when the meter is calibrated.
• Do not reuse buffer solutions!
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on how to collect water samples using
screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Measure pH
The procedure for measuring pH is the same whether it is conducted in the field or lab.
If you are using a "pocket pal" or color comparator, follow the manufacturer's instructions. Use the following
steps to determine the pH of your sample if you are using a meter.
1. Rinse the electrode well with deionized water.
2. Place the pH meter or electrode into the sample. Depress the dispenser button once to dispense electrolyte.
Read and record the temperature and pH in the appropriate column on the data sheet. Rinse the electrode
well with deionized water. 3. Measure the pH of the 4.01 and 7.0 buffers periodically to ensure that the
meter is not drifting off calibration. If it has drifted, recalibrate it.
TASK 4 Return the field data sheets and samples to the lab or drop-off
point.
Samples for pH must be analyzed within 2 hours of collection. If the samples cannot be analyzed in the field,
keep the samples on ice and take them to the lab or drop-off point as soon as possible within the 2-hour limit.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water andwastewater. 18th ed. American Public Health
Association, Washington, DC. River Watch Network. 1992. Total alkalinity and pH field and laboratory
procedures (based on University of Massachusetts Acid Rain Monitoring Project). July 1.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.5
Turbidity
What is turbidity and why is it important?
Turbidity is a measure of water clarity how much the material suspended in water
decreases the passage of light through the water. Suspended materials include soil
particles (clay, silt, and sand), algae, plankton, microbes, and other substances. These
materials are typically in the size range of 0.004 mm (clay) to 1.0 mm (sand). Turbidity
can affect the color of the water.
Higher turbidity increases water temperatures because suspended particles absorb more
heat. This, in turn, reduces the concentration of dissolved oxygen (DO) because warm
water holds less DO than cold. Higher turbidity also reduces the amount of light
penetrating the water, which reduces photosynthesis and the production of DO.
Suspended materials can clog fish gills, reducing resistance to disease in fish, lowering
growth rates, and affecting egg and larval development. As the particles settle, they can
blanket the stream bottom, especially in slower waters, and smother fish eggs and benthic
macroinvertebrates. Sources of turbidity include:
• Soil erosion
• Waste discharge
• Urban runoff
• Eroding stream banks
• Large numbers of bottom feeders (such as carp), which stir up bottom sediments
• Excessive algal growth.
Sampling and equipment considerations
Turbidity can be useful as an indicator of the effects of runoff from construction,
agricultural practices, logging activity, discharges, and other sources. Turbidity often
increases sharply during a rainfall, especially in developed watersheds, which typically
have relatively high proportions of impervious surfaces. The flow of stormwater runoff
from impervious surfaces rapidly increases stream velocity, which increases the erosion
-------
rates of streambanks and channels. Turbidity can also rise sharply during dry weather if
earth-disturbing activities are occurring in or near a stream without erosion control
practices in place.
Regular monitoring of turbidity can help detect trends that might indicate increasing
erosion in developing watersheds. However, turbidity is closely related to stream flow
and velocity and should be correlated with these factors. Comparisons of the change in
turbidity over time, therefore, should be made at the same point at the same flow.
Turbidity is not a measurement of the amount of suspended solids present or the rate of
sedimentation of a steam since it measures only the amount of light that is scattered by
suspended particles. Measurement of total solids is a more direct measure of the amount
of material suspended and dissolved in water (see section 5.9 - Conductivity).
Turbidity is generally measured by using a turbidity meter. Volunteer programs may also
take samples to a lab for analysis. Another approach is to measure transparency (an
integrated measure of light scattering and absorption) instead of turbidity. Water
clarity/transparency can be measured using a Secchi disk or transparency tube. The
Secchi disk can only be used in deep, slow moving rivers; the transparency tube, a
comparatively new development, is gaining acceptance in programs around the country
but is not yet in wide use (see Using a Secchi Disk or Tranparency Tube].
A turbidity
meter consists
of a light
source that
illuminates a
water sample
and a
photoelectric
cell that
measures the
intensity of
light scattered
at a 90 angle
by the
particles in the
sample. It
measures
turbidity in
nephelometric
turbidity units
or NTUs.
Meters can
measure
turbidity over
-------
a wide range
from 0 to 1000
NTUs. A clear
mountain _ ^__ ^
stream might " _. — —,^/^f -"."'- "7\ O
have a
turbidity of
around 1
NTU, whereas
a large river
like the
Mississippi
might have a
dry-weather
turbidity of
around 10 .,
-------
cleaned before the first run and after each sampling run by following Method A described
in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety consideration, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, when sampling for turbidity,
include the following equipment:
• Turbidity meter
• Turbidity standards
• Lint-free cloth to wipe the cells of the meter
• Data sheet for turbidity to record results
Be sure to let someone know where you are going and when you expect to return.
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on how to collect
water samples using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Analyze the sample
The following procedure applies to field or lab use of the turbidity meter.
1. Prepare the turbidity meter for use according to the manufacturer's directions.
2. Use the turbidity standards provided with the meter to calibrate it. Make sure it is
reading accurately in the range in which you will be working.
3. Shake the sample vigorously and wait until the bubbles have disappeared. You
might want to tap the sides of the bottle gently to accelerate the process.
4. Use a lint-free cloth to wipe the outside of the tube into which the sample will be
poured. Be sure not to handle the tube below the line where the light will pass
when the tube is placed in the meter.
5. Pour the sample water into the tube. Wipe off any drops on the outside of the tube.
6. Set the meter for the appropriate turbidity range. Place the tube in the meter and
read the turbidity measurement directly from the meter display.
7. Record the result on the field or lab sheet.
8. Repeat steps 3-7 for each sample.
-------
TASK 5 Return the samples and the field data sheets to
the lab/drop-off point.
If you are sending your samples to a lab for analysis, they must be tested within 24 hours
of collection. Keep samples in the dark and on ice or refrigerated.
References and Further Reading
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18tned.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1997. An Attempt to Classify Transparency Tube
Readings for Southern Minnesota, by Lee Ganske. Contact Louise Hotka, MPCA, Tel:
(612) 296-7223, E-mail: louise.hotka@pca.state.mn.us.
Mississippi Headwaters River Watch. 1991. Water quality procedures. Mississippi
Headwaters Board. March.
Mitchell, M.K., and W. Stapp. Field manual for water quality monitoring. 5th ed.
Thompson Shore Printers.
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). 1995 (draft). Clean Water Initiative Volunteer
Stream Monitoring Methods Manual. TVA, 1101 Market Street, CST 17D, Chattanooga,
TN 37402-2801
USEPA. 1991. Volunteer lake monitoring: A methods manual. EPA 440/4-91-002. Office
of Water, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
White, T. 1994. Monitoring a watershed: Nationwide turbidity testing in Australia.
Volunteer Monitor. 6(2):22-23.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
£JLCPIi United Stale
Office of Water
En vl ronmenflal i v rr I JM-.S A r
f'rnlt*-\:t inn
home
Back to Section 5.5 - Turbidity
Using a Secchi Disk or Transparency Tube
Secchi Disk
A Secchi disk is a black and white disk that is lowered by hand into the water to the depth
at which it vanishes from sight (Figure 5.10). The distance to vanishing is then recorded.
The clearer the water, the greater the distance. Secchi disks are simple to use and
inexpensive. For river monitoring they have limited use, however, because in most cases
the river bottom will be visible and the disk will not reach a vanishing point. Deeper,
slower moving rivers are the most appropriate places for Secchi disk measurement
although the current might require that the disk be extra-weighted so it does not sway and
make measurement difficult. Secchi disks cost about $50 and can be homemade.
The line attached to the Secchi disk must be marked according to units designated by the
volunteer program, in waterproof ink. Many programs require volunteers to measure to
the nearest 1/10 meter. Meter intervals can be tagged (e.g., with duct tape) for ease of
use.
To measure water clarity with a Secchi disk:
• Check to make sure that the Secchi disk is securely attached to the measured line.
• Lean over the side of the boat and lower the Secchi disk into the water, keeping
your back toward the sun to block glare.
• Lower the disk until it disappears from view. Lower it one third of a meter and
then slowly raise the disk until it just reappears. Move the disk up and down until
the exact vanishing point is found.
• Attach a clothespin to the line at the point where the line enters the water. Record
the measurement on your data sheet. Repeating the measurement will provide you
with a quality control check.
The key to consistent results is to train volunteers to follow standard sampling procedures
and, if possible, have the same individual take the reading at the same site throughout the
season.
Transparency Tube
Pioneered by Australia's Department of Conservation, the transparency tube is a clear,
narrow plastic tube marked in units with a dark pattern painted on the bottom. Water is
-------
poured into the tube until the pattern disappears (Figure 5.11). Some U.S. volunteer
monitoring programs (e.g., the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Clean Water Initiative
and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)) are testing the transparency tube
in streams and rivers. MPCA uses tubes marked in centimeters, and has found tube
readings to relate fairly well to lab measurements of turbidity and total suspended solids
(although they do not recommend the transparency tube for applications where precise
and accurate measurement is required or in highly colored waters).
The TVA and MPCA recommend the following sampling considerations:
• Collect the sample in a bottle or bucket in mid-stream and mid-depth if possible.
Avoid stagnant water and sample as far from the shoreline as is safe. Avoid
collecting sediment from the bottom of the stream.
• Face upstream as you fill the bottle or bucket.
• Take readings in open but shaded conditions. Avoid direct sunlight by turning your
back to the sun.
• Carefully stir or swish the water in the bucket or bottle until it is homogeneous,
taking care not to produce air bubbles (these will scatter light and affect the
measurement). Then pour the water slowly in the tube while looking down the
tube. Measure the depth of the water column in the tube when the symbol just
disappears.
For more information on using a transparency tube, see the references at the end of this
section. Many programs have begun making their own tubes. They now may also be
purchased in the U.S. (see Appendix B — Scientific Supply Houses).
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
United SI ales
AFPA1
^IJp I_I f^\ Eniflronmvnlal Protection Agency
•
Quality
5.6
Phosphorus
is phosphorus important?
Both phosphorus and nitrogen are essential nutrients for the plants and animals that make up the aquatic food
web. Since phosphorus is the nutrient in short supply in most fresh waters, even a modest increase in phosphorus
can, under the right conditions, set off a whole chain of undesirable events in a stream including accelerated plant
growth, algae blooms, low dissolved oxygen, and the death of certain fish, invertebrates, and other aquatic
animals.
There are many sources of phosphorus, both natural and human. These include soil and rocks, wastewater
treatment plants, runoff from fertilized lawns and cropland, failing septic systems, runoff from animal manure
storage areas, disturbed land areas, drained wetlands, water treatment, and commercial cleaning preparations.
Forms of phosphorus
Phosphorus has a complicated story. Pure, "elemental" phosphorus (P) is rare. In nature, phosphorus usually
exists as part of a phosphate molecule (PO4). Phosphorus in aquatic systems occurs as organic phosphate and
inorganic phosphate. Organic phosphate consists of a phosphate molecule associated with a carbon-based
molecule, as in plant or animal tissue. Phosphate that is not associated with organic material is inorganic.
Inorganic phosphorus is the form required by plants. Animals can use either organic or inorganic phosphate.
Both organic and inorganic phosphorus can either be dissolved in the water or suspended (attached to particles in
the water column).
The phosphorus cycle
THE PHOSPHORUS CYCLE
Inorganic phosphorus c==Hi> Intake by plants
(from various natural and human sources) (converted (o organic P)
Grazing and predation by animals
inorganic P
returned to
waler column
Death
Death
f xcretfan
Decomposition
P converted to inorganic P by bacterial action)
-------
Phosphorus cycles through the environment, changing form as it does so (Fig. 5.12). Aquatic plants take in
dissolved inorganic phosphorus and convert it to organic phosphorus as it becomes part of their tissues. Animals
get the organic phosphorus they need by eating either aquatic plants, other animals, or decomposing plant and
animal material.
As plants and animals excrete wastes or die, the organic phosphorus they contain sinks to the bottom, where
bacterial decomposition converts it back to inorganic phosphorus, both dissolved and attached to particles. This
inorganic phosphorus gets back into the water column when the bottom is stirred up by animals, human activity,
chemical interactions, or water currents. Then it is taken up by plants and the cycle begins again.
In a stream system, the phosphorus cycle tends to move phosphorus downstream as the current carries
decomposing plant and animal tissue and dissolved phosphorus. It becomes stationary only when it is taken up by
plants or is bound to particles that settle to the bottom of pools.
In the field of water quality chemistry, phosphorus is described using several terms. Some of these terms are
chemistry based (referring to chemically based compounds), and others are methods-based (they describe what is
measured by a particular method).
The term "orthophosphate" is a chemistry-based term that refers to the phosphate molecule all by itself. "Reactive
phosphorus" is a corresponding method-based term that describes what you are actually measuring when you
perform the test for orthophosphate. Because the lab procedure isn't quite perfect, you get mostly orthophosphate
but you also get a small fraction of some other forms.
More complex inorganic phosphate compounds are referred to as "condensed phosphates" or "polyphosphates."
The method-based term for these forms is "acid hydrolyzable."
Monitoring phosphorus
Monitoring phosphorus is challenging because it involves measuring very low concentrations down to 0.01
milligram per liter (mg/L) or even lower. Even such very low concentrations of phosphorus can have a dramatic
impact on streams. Less sensitive methods should be used only to identify serious problem areas.
While there are many tests for phosphorus, only four are likely to be performed by volunteer monitors.
1. The total orthophosphate test is largely a measure of orthophosphate. Because the sample is not filtered,
the procedure measures both dissolved and suspended orthophosphate. The EPA-approved method for
measuring total orthophosphate is known as the ascorbic acid method. Briefly, a reagent (either liquid or
powder) containing ascorbic acid and ammonium molybdate reacts with orthophosphate in the sample to
form a blue compound. The intensity of the blue color is directly proportional to the amount of
orthophosphate in the water.
2. The total phosphorus test measures all the forms of phosphorus in the sample (orthophosphate, condensed
phosphate, and organic phosphate). This is accomplished by first "digesting" (heating and acidifying) the
sample to convert all the other forms to orthophosphate. Then the orthophosphate is measured by the
ascorbic acid method. Because the sample is not filtered, the procedure measures both dissolved and
suspended orthophosphate.
3. The dissolved phosphorus test measures that fraction of the total phosphorus which is in solution in the
water (as opposed to being attached to suspended particles). It is determined by first filtering the sample,
then analyzing the filtered sample for total phosphorus.
4. Insoluble phosphorus is calculated by subtracting the dissolved phosphorus result from the total
phosphorus result.
All these tests have one thing in common they all depend on measuring orthophosphate. The total orthophosphate
test measures the orthophosphate that is already present in the sample. The others measure that which is already
present and that which is formed when the other forms of phosphorus are converted to orthophosphate by
digestion.
-------
Sampling and equipment considerations
Monitoring phosphorus involves two basic steps:
• Collecting a water sample
• Analyzing it in the field or lab for one of the types of phosphorus described above. This manual does not
address laboratory methods. Refer to the references cited at the end of this section.
Sample Containers
Sample containers made of either some form of plastic or Pyrex glass are acceptable to EPA. Because phosphorus
molecules have a tendency to "adsorb" (attach) to the inside surface of sample containers, if containers are to be
reused they must be acid-washed to remove adsorbed phosphorus. Therefore, the container must be able to
withstand repeated contact with hydrochloric acid. Plastic containers either high-density polyethylene or
polypropylene might be preferable to glass from a practical standpoint because they will better withstand
breakage. Some programs use disposable, sterile, plastic Whirl-pak® bags. The size of the container will depend
on the sample amount needed for the phosphorus analysis method you choose and the amount needed for other
analyses you intend to perform.
Dedicated Labware
All containers that will hold water samples or come into contact with reagents used in this test must be dedicated.
That is, they should not be used for other tests. This is to eliminate the possibility that reagents containing
phosphorus will contaminate the labware. All labware should be acid-washed. The only form of phosphorus this
manual recommends for field analysis is total orthophosphate, which uses the ascorbic acid method on an
untreated sample. Analysis of any of the other forms requires adding potentially hazardous reagents, heating the
sample to boiling, and using too much time and too much equipment to be practical. In addition, analysis for
other forms of phosphorus is prone to errors and inaccuracies in a field situation. Pretreatment and analysis for
these other forms should be handled in a laboratory.
Ascorbic Acid Method
In the ascorbic acid method, a combined liquid or prepackaged powder reagent, consisting of sulfuric acid,
potassium antimonyl tartrate, ammonium molybdate, and ascorbic acid (or comparable compounds), is added to
either 50 or 25 mL of the water sample. This colors the sample blue in direct proportion to the amount of
orthophosphate in the sample. Absorbance or transmittance is then measured after 10 minutes, but before 30
minutes, using a color comparator with a scale in milligrams per liter that increases with the increase in color hue,
or an electronic meter that measures the amount of light absorbed or transmitted at a wavelength of 700 - 880
nanometers (again depending on manufacturer's directions).
A color comparator may be useful for identifying heavily polluted sites with high concentrations (greater than 0.1
mg/L). However, matching the color of a treated sample to a comparator can be very subjective, especially at low
concentrations, and can lead to variable results.
A field spectrophotometer or colorimeter with a 2.5-cm light path and an infrared photocell (set for a wavelength
of 700-880 nm) is recommended for accurate determination of low concentrations (between 0.2 and 0.02 mg/L ).
Use of a meter requires that you prepare and analyze known standard concentrations ahead of time in order to
convert the absorbance readings of your stream sample to milligrams per liter, or that your meter reads directly as
milligrams per liter.
How to prepare standard concentrations
Note that this step is best accomplished in the lab before leaving for sampling. Standards are prepared using a
phosphate standard solution of 3 mg/L as phosphate (PO4). This is equivalent to a concentration of 1 mg/L as
Phosphorus (P). All references to concentrations and results from this point on in this procedure will be expressed
as mg/L as P, since this is the convention for reporting results.
Six standard concentrations will be prepared for every sampling date in the range of expected results. For most
samples, the following six concentrations should be adequate:
-------
0.00 mg/L 0.12mg/L
0.04mg/L 0.16 mg/L
0.08 mg/L 0.20 mg/L
Proceed as follows:
1. Set out six 25-mL volumetric flasks one for each standard. Label the flasks 0.00, 0.04, 0.08, 0.12, 0.16, and
0.20.
2. Pour about 30 mL of the phosphate standard solution into a 50 mL beaker.
3. Use 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-mL Class A volumetric pipets to transfer corresponding volumes of phosphate
standard solution to each 25-mL volumetric flask as follows:
Standard mL of Phosphate
Concentration Standard Solution
0.00 0
0.04 1
0.08 2
0.12 3
0.16 4
0.20 5
Note: The standard solution is calculated based on the equation: A = (B x C) 6 D
Where:
A = mL of standard solution needed
B = desired concentration of standard
C = final volume (mL) of standard
D = concentration of standard solution
For example, to find out how much phosphate standard solution to use to make a 0.04-mg/L standard:
A = (0.04x25) 6 1 A=l mL
Before transferring the solution, clear each pipet by filling it once with the standard solution and blowing it out.
Rinse each pipet with deionized water after use.
4. Fill the remainder of each 25 mL volumetric flask with distilled, deionized water to the 25 mL line. Swirl
to mix.
5. Set out and label six 50-mL Erlenmeyer flasks: 0.00, 0.04, 0.08, 0.12, 0.16, and 0.20. Pour the standards
from the volumetric flasks to the Erlenmeyer flasks.
6. List the standard concentrations (0.00, 0.04, 0.08, 0.12, 0.16, and 0.20) under "Bottle #" on the lab sheet.
7. Analyze each of these standard concentrations as described in the section below.
How to collect and analyze samples
The field procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for phosphorus consist of the following tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
If factory-sealed, disposable Whirl-pak® bags are used for sampling, no preparation is needed. Reused sample
containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be cleaned (including acid rinse) before the first run
and after each sampling run by following the procedure described in Method B on page 128. Remember to wear
latex gloves.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sample site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and time, safety
considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In addition to sample containers and the
standard sampling apparel, you will need the following equipment and supplies for total reactive phosphorus
-------
analysis:
• Color comparator or field spectrophotometer with sample tubes for reading the absorbance of the sample
• Prepackaged reagents (combined reagents) to turn the water blue
• Deionized or distilled water to rinse the sample tubes between uses
• Wash bottle to hold rinse water
• Mixing container with a mark at the recommended sample volume (usually 25 mL) to hold and mix the
sample
• Clean, lint-free wipes to clean and dry the sample tubes
Note that prepackaged reagents are recommended for ease and safety.
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in the Introduction to Chapter 5 for details on how to collect water samples using screw-cap
bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Analyze the sample in the field (for total orthophosphate only)
using the ascorbic acid method.
If using an electronic spectrophotometer or colorimeter:
1. "Zero" the meter (if you are using one) using a reagent blank (distilled water plus the reagent powder) and
following the manufacturer's directions.
2. Pour the recommended sample volume (usually 25 mL) into a mixing container and add reagent powder
pillows. Swirl to mix. Wait the recommended time (usually at least 10 minutes) before proceeding.
3. Pour the first field sample into the sample cell test tube. Wipe the tube with a lint-free cloth to be sure it is
clean and free of smudges or water droplets. Insert the tube into the sample cell.
4. Record the bottle number on the field data sheet.
5. Place the cover over the sample cell. Read the absorbance or concentration of this sample and record it on
the field data sheet.
6. Pour the sample back into its flask.
7. Rinse the sample cell test tube and mixing container three times with distilled, deionized water. Avoid
touching the lower portion of the sample cell test tube. Wipe with a clean, lint-free wipe. Be sure that the
lower part of the sample cell test tube is clean and free of smudges or water droplets.
Be sure to use the same sample cell test tube for each sample. If the test tube breaks, use a new one and repeat
step 1 to "zero" the meter.
If using a color comparator:
1. Follow the manufacturer's directions. Be sure to pay attention to the direction of your light source when
reading the color development. The light source should be in the same position relative to the color
comparator for each sample. Otherwise, this is a source of significant error. As a quality check, have
someone else read the comparator after you.
2. Record the concentration on the field data sheet.
TASK 5 Return the samples (for lab analysis for other tests) and the field
data sheets to the lab/drop-off point.
Samples for different types of phosphorus must be analyzed within a certain time period. For some types of
phosphorus, this is a matter of hours; for others, samples can be preserved and held for longer periods. Samples
being tested for orthophosphate must be analyzed within 48 hours of collection. In any case, keep the samples on
ice and take them to the lab or drop-off point as soon as possible.
-------
TASK 6 Analyze the samples in the lab.
Lab methods for other tests are described in the references below (APHA. 1992; Hach Company, 1992; River
Watch Network, 1992; USEPA, 1983).
TASK 7 Report the results and convert to milligrams per liter
First, absorbance values must be converted to milligrams per liter. This is done by constructing a "standard curve"
using the absorbance results from your standard concentrations.
1. Make an absorbance versus concentration graph on graph paper:
O Make the "y" (vertical) axis and label it "absorbance." Mark this axis in 0.05 increments from 0 as
high as the graph paper will allow.
O Make the "x" (horizontal) axis and label it "concentration: mg/L as P." Mark this axis with the
concentration of the standards: 0, 0.04, 0.08, 0.12, 0.16, 0.20.
2. Plot the absorbance of the standard concentrations on the graph.
3. Draw a "best fit" straight line through these points. The line should touch (or almost touch) each of the
points. If it doesn't, make up new standards and repeat the procedure.
Example: Suppose you measure the absorbance of the six standard concentrations as follows:
Concentration Absorbance
0.00
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
0.20
0.000
0.039
0.078
0.105
0.155
0.192
020
0.15-
0.10-
0.05-
000
0.00
0.04
00S
0.12
0.16
020
The resulting standard curve is displayed in Fig. 5.13.
4. For each sample, locate the absorbance on the "y"
axis, read horizontally over to the line, and then more
down to read the concentration in mg/L as P.
5. Record the concentration on the lab sheet in the
appropriate column. NOTE: The detection limit for
this test is 0.01 mg/L. Report any results less than 0.01 ;
as "<0.01." Round off all results to the nearest
hundredth of a mg/L.
Results can either be reported "as P" or "as PO4." Remember
that your results are reported as milligrams per liter weight
per unit of volume. Since the PO4 molecule is three times as
heavy as the P atom, results reported as PO4 are three times
the concentration of those reported as P. For example, if you
measure 0.06 mg/L as PO4, that's equivalent to 0.02 mg/L as
P. To convert PO4 to P, divide by 3. To convert P to PO4, "7~7777~7 , v „. ,, . :_ ,.. ,,.,...
multiply by 3. To avoid this confusion, and since most state . , •.,•'.'•'.','.,''':.'••"•'•.••
water quality standards are reported as P, this manual
recommends that results always be reported as P.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water andwastewater. 18th ed. American Public Health
Association, Washington, DC.
Black, J.A. 1977. Water pollution technology. Reston Publishing Co., Reston, VA.
Caduto, MJ. 1990. Pond and brook. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH.
Concentration (mgA. tm F)
-------
Dates, Geoff. 1994. Monitoring for phosphorus or how come they don't tell you this stuff in the manual?
Volunteer Monitor, Vol. 6(1), spring 1994.
Hach Company. 1992. Hack water analysis handbook. 2nd ed. Loveland, CO.
River Watch Network. 1991. Total phosphorus test (adapted from Standard Methods). July 17.
River Watch Network. 1992. Total phosphorus (persulfate digestion followed by ascorbic acid procedure, Hach
adaptation of Standard Methods). July 1.
USEPA. 1983. Methods for chemical analysis of'water andwastes. 2nd ed. Method 365.2. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.7
Nitrates
What are nitrates and why are they important?
Nitrates are a form of nitrogen, which is found in several different forms in terrestrial and
aquatic ecosystems. These forms of nitrogen include ammonia (NH3), nitrates (NO3),
and nitrites (NO2). Nitrates are essential plant nutrients, but in excess amounts they can
cause significant water quality problems. Together with phosphorus, nitrates in excess
amounts can accelerate eutrophication, causing dramatic increases in aquatic plant
growth and changes in the types of plants and animals that live in the stream. This, in
turn, affects dissolved oxygen, temperature, and other indicators. Excess nitrates can
cause hypoxia (low levels of dissolved oxygen) and can become toxic to warm-blooded
animals at higher concentrations (10 mg/L) or higher) under certain conditions. The
natural level of ammonia or nitrate in surface water is typically low (less than 1 mg/L); in
the effluent of wastewater treatment plants, it can range up to 30 mg/L.
Sources of nitrates include wastewater treatment plants, runoff from fertilized lawns and
cropland, failing on-site septic systems, runoff from animal manure storage areas, and
industrial discharges that contain corrosion inhibitors.
Sampling and equipment considerations
Nitrates from land sources end up in rivers and streams more quickly than other nutrients
like phosphorus. This is because they dissolve in water more readily than phosphates,
which have an attraction for soil particles. As a result, nitrates serve as a better indicator
of the possibility of a source of sewage or manure pollution during dry weather.
Water that is polluted with nitrogen-rich organic matter might show low nitrates.
Decomposition of the organic matter lowers the dissolved oxygen level, which in turn
slows the rate at which ammonia is oxidized to nitrite (NO2) and then to nitrate (NO3).
Under such circumstances, it might be necessary to also monitor for nitrites or ammonia,
which are considerably more toxic to aquatic life than nitrate. (See Standard Methods
section 4500-NH3 and 4500-NO2 for appropriate nitrite methods; APHA, 1992)
Water samples to be tested for nitrate should be collected in glass or polyethylene
-------
containers that have been prepared by using Method B in the introduction.
Volunteer monitoring programs usually use two methods for nitrate testing: the cadmium
reduction method and the nitrate electrode. The more commonly used cadmium reduction
method produces a color reaction that is then measured either by comparison to a color
wheel or by use of a spectrophotometer. A few programs also use a nitrate electrode,
which can measure in the range of 0 to 100 mg/L nitrate. A newer colorimetric
immunoassay technique for nitrate screening is also now available and might be
applicable for volunteers.
Cadmium Reduction Method
The cadmium reduction method is a colorimetric method that involves contact of the
nitrate in the sample with cadmium particles, which cause nitrates to be converted to
nitrites. The nitrites then react with another reagent to form a red color whose intensity is
proportional to the original amount of nitrate. The red color is then measured either by
comparison to a color wheel with a scale in milligrams per liter that increases with the
increase in color hue, or by use of an electronic spectrophotometer that measures the
amount of light absorbed by the treated sample at a 543-nanometer wavelength. The
absorbance value is then converted to the equivalent concentration of nitrate by using a
standard curve. Methods for making standard solutions and standard curves are presented
at the end of this section.
This curve should be created by the program advisor before each sampling run. The curve
is developed by making a set of standard concentrations of nitrate, reacting them and
developing the corresponding color, and then plotting the absorbance value for each
concentration against concentration. A standard curve could also be generated for the
color wheel.
Use of the color wheel is appropriate only if nitrate concentrations are greater than 1
mg/L. For concentrations below 1 mg/L, a spectrophotometer should be used. Matching
the color of a treated sample at low concentrations to a color wheel (or cubes) can be very
subjective and can lead to variable results. Color comparators can, however, be
effectively used to identify sites with high nitrates.
This method requires that the samples being treated are clear. If a sample is turbid, it
should be filtered through a 0.45-micron filter. Be sure to test whether the filter is
nitrate-free. If copper, iron, or other metals are present in concentrations above several
mg/L, the reaction with the cadmium will be slowed down and the reaction time will have
to be increased.
The reagents used for this method are often prepackaged for different ranges, depending
on the expected concentration of nitrate in the stream. For example, the Hach Company
provides reagents for the following ranges: low (0 to 0.40 mg/L), medium (0 to 4.5
mg/L), and high (0 to 30 mg/L). You should determine the appropriate range for the
stream being monitored.
Nitrate Electrode Method
-------
A nitrate electrode (used with a meter) is similar in function to a dissolved oxygen meter.
It consists of a probe with a sensor that measures nitrate activity in the water; this activity
affects the electric potential of a solution in the probe. This change is then transmitted to
the meter, which converts the electric signal to a scale that is read in millivolts. The
millivolts are then converted to mg/L of nitrate by plotting them from a standard curve
(see above). The accuracy of the electrode can be affected by high concentrations of
chloride or bicarbonate ions in the sample water. Fluctuating pH levels can also affect the
reading by the meter.
Nitrate electrodes and meters are expensive compared to field kits that employ the
cadmium reduction method. (The expense is comparable, however, if a
spectrophotometer is used rather than a color wheel.) Meter/probe combinations run
between $700 and $1,200 including a long cable to connect the probe to the meter. If the
program has a pH meter that displays readings in millivolts, it can be used with a nitrate
probe and no separate nitrate meter is needed. Results are read directly as milligrams per
liter.
Although nitrate electrodes and spectrophotometers can be used in the field, they have
certain disadvantages. These devices are more fragile than the color comparators and are
therefore more at risk of breaking in the field. They must be carefully maintained and
must be calibrated before each sample run and, if you are doing many tests, between
samplings. This means that samples are best tested in the lab. Note that samples to be
tested with a nitrate electrode should be at room temperature, whereas color comparators
can be used in the field with samples at any temperature.
How to collect and analyze samples
The procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for nitrate consist of the following
tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
If factory-sealed, disposable Whirl-pak® bags are used for sampling, no preparation is
needed. Reused sample containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be
cleaned before the first run and after each sampling by following the method described on
page 128 under Method B. Remember to wear latex gloves.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, the following equipment is
needed when analyzing nitrate nitrogen in the field:
• Color comparator or field spectrophotometer with sample tubes (for reading
absorbance of the sample)
-------
• Reagent powder pillows (reagents to turn the water red)
• Deionized or distilled water to rinse the sample tubes between uses
• Wash bottle to hold rinse water
• Waste bottle with secure lid to hold used cadmium particles, which should be
clearly labeled and returned to the lab, where the cadmium will be properly
disposed of
• Mixing container with a mark at the sample volume (usually 25 mL) to hold and
mix the sample
• Clean, lint-free wipes to clean and dry the sample tubes
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on collecting a
sample using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Analyze the sample in the field
Cadmium Reduction Method With a Spectrophotometer
The following is the general procedure to analyze a sample using the cadmium reduction
method with a spectrophotometer. However, this should not replace the manufacturer's
directions if they differ from the steps provided below:
1. Pour the first field sample into the sample cell test tube and insert it into the sample
cell of the spectrophotometer.
2. Record the bottle number on the lab sheet.
3. Place the cover over the sample cell. Read the absorbance or concentration of this
sample and record it on the field data sheet.
4. Pour the sample back into the waste bottle for disposal at the lab.
Cadmium Reduction Method With a Color Comparator
To analyze a sample using the cadmium reduction method with a color comparator,
follow the manufacturer's directions and record the concentration on the field data sheet.
TASK 5 Return the samples and the field data sheets to
the lab/drop-off point for analysis
Samples being sent to a lab for analysis must be tested for nitrates within 48 hours of
collection. Keep samples in the dark and on ice or refrigerated.
-------
TASK 6 Determine results (for spectrophotometer
absorbance or nitrate electrode) in lab
Preparation of Standard Concentrations
Cadmium Reduction Method With a Spectrophotometer
First determine the range you will be testing (low, medium, or high). For each range you
will need to determine the lower end, which will be determined by the detection limit of
your spectrophotometer. The high end of the range will be the endpoint of the range you
are using. Use a nitrate nitrogen standard solution of appropriate strength for the range in
which you are working. A 1-mg/L nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) solution would be suitable
for low-range (0 to 1.0 mg/L) tests. A 100-mg/L standard solution would be appropriate
for medium- and high-range tests. In the following example, it is assumed that a set of
standards for a 0 to 5.0 mg/L range is being prepared.
Example:
1. Set out six 25-mL volumetric flasks (one for each standard). Label the flasks 0.0,
1.0,2.0, 3.0,4.0, and 5.0.
2. Pour 30 mL of a 25-mg/L nitrate nitrogen standard solution into a 50-mL beaker.
3. Use 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-mL Class A volumetric pipets to transfer corresponding
volumes of nitrate nitrogen standard solution to each 25-mL volumetric flask as
follows:
Standard mL of Nitrate Nitrogen
Solution Standard Solution
0.0 0
1.0 1
2.0 2
3.0 3
4.0 4
5.0 5
Analysis of the Cadmium Reduction Method Standard Concentrations
Use the following procedure to analyze the standard concentrations.
1. Add reagent powder pillows to the nitrate nitrogen standard concentrations.
2. Shake each tube vigorously for at least 3 minutes.
3. For each tube, wait at least 10 minutes but not more than 20 minutes to proceed.
4. "Zero" the spectrophotometer using the 0.0 standard concentration and following
the manufacturer's directions. Record the absorbance as "0" in the absorbance
column on the lab sheet. Rinse the sample cell three times with distilled water.
5. Read and record the absorbance of the 1.0-mg/L standard concentration.
6. Rinse the sample cell test tube three times with distilled or deionized water. Avoid
-------
touching the lower part of the sample cell test tube. Wipe with a clean, lint-free
wipe. Be sure that the lower part of the sample cell test tube is clean and free of
smudges or water droplets.
7. Repeat steps 3 and 4 for each standard.
8. Prepare a calibration curve and convert absorbance to mg/L as follows:
o Make an absorbance versus concentration graph on graph paper:
(a) Make the vertical (y) axis and label it "absorbance." Mark this axis in 1.0
increments from 0 as high as the graph paper will allow.
(b) Make the horizontal (x) axis and label it "concentration: mg/L as nitrate
nitrogen." Mark this axis with the concentrations of the standards: 0.0, 1.0,
2.0, 3.0,4.0, and 5.0.
o Plot the absorbance of the standard concentrations on the graph.
o Draw a "best fit" straight line through these points. The line should touch (or
almost touch) each of the points. If it doesn't, the results of this procedure
are not valid.
o For each sample, locate the absorbance on the "y" axis, read over
horizontally to the line, and then move down to read the concentration in
mg/L as nitrate nitrogen.
o Record the concentration on the lab sheet in the appropriate column.
For Nitrate Electrode
Standards are prepared using nitrate standard solutions of 100 and 10 mg/L as nitrate
nitrogen (NO3-N). All references to concentrations and results in this procedure will be
expressed as mg/L as NO3-N. Eight standard concentrations will be prepared:
100.0 mg/L 0.40 mg/L
10.0 mg/L 0.32 mg/L
1.0 mg/L 0.20 mg/L
0.8 mg/L 0.12 mg/L
Use the following procedure:
1. Set out eight 25-mL volumetric flasks (one for each standard). Label the flasks
100.0, 10.0, 1.0, 0.8, 0.4, 0.32, 0.2, and 0.12.
2. To make the 100.0-mg/L standard, pour 25 mL of the 100-mg/L nitrate standard
solution into the flask labeled 100.0.
3. To make the 10.0-mg/L standard, pour 25 mL of the 10-mg/L nitrate standard
solution into the flask labeled 10.0.
4. To make the 1.0-mg/L standard, use a 10- or 5-mL pipet to measure 2.5 mL of the
10-mg/L nitrate standard solution into the flask labeled 1.0. Fill the flask with 22.5
mL distilled, deionized water to the fill line. Rinse the pipet with deionized water.
5. To make the 0.8-mg/L standard, use a 10- or 5-mL pipet or a 2-mL volumetric
pipet to measure 2 mL of the 10-mg/L nitrate standard solution into the flask
-------
labeled 0.8. Fill the flask with about 23 mL distilled, deionized water to the fill
line. Rinse the pipet with deionized water. 6. To make the 0.4-mg/L standard, use a
10- or 5-mL pipet or a 1-mL volumetric pipet to measure 1 mL of the 10-mg/L
nitrate standard solution into the flask labeled 0.4. Fill the flask with about 24 mL
distilled, deionized water to the fill line. Rinse the pipet with deionized water.
6. To make the 0.32-, 0.2-, and 0.12-mg/L standards, follow step 4 to make a 25-mL
volume of 1.0 mg/L standard solution. Transfer this to a beaker. Pipet the
following volumes into the appropriately labeled volumetric flasks:
Standard mL of Nitrate Nitrogen
Solution Standard Solution
0.32 8
0.20 5
0.12 3
Fill each flask up to the fill line. Rinse pipets with deionized water.
Analysis of the Nitrate Electrode Standard Concentrations
Use the following procedure to analyze the standard concentrations.
1. List the standard concentrations (100.0, 10.0, 1.0, 0.8, 0.4, 0.32, 0.2, and 0.12)
under "bottle #" on the lab sheet.
2. Prepare a calibration curve and convert to mg/L as follows:
o Plot absorbance or mV readings for the 100-, 10-, and 1-mg/L standards on
semi-logarithmic graph paper, with concentration on the logarithmic (x) axis
and the absorbance or millivolts (mV) on the linear (y) axis.
For the nitrate electrode curve, a straight line with a slope of 58 n 3
mV/decade at 25 C should result. That is, measurements of 10- and
100-mg/L standard solutions should be no more than 58 ± 3 mV apart.
o Plot absorbance or mV readings for the 1.0-, 0.8-, 0.4-, 0.32-, 0.2-, and
0.12-mg/L standards on semi-logarithmic graph paper, with concentration on
the logarithmic (x) axis and the millivolts (mV) on the linear (y) axis.
For the nitrate electrode, the result here should be a curved line since the
response of the electrode at these low concentrations is not linear.
o For the nitrate electrode, recalibrate the electrodes several times daily by
checking the mV reading of the 10-mg/L and 0.4-mg/L standards and
adjusting the calibration control on the meter until the reading plotted on the
calibration curve is displayed again.
-------
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18thed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.8
Total Solids
l/l/faaf are total solids and why are they important?
Total solids are dissolved solids plus suspended and settleable solids in water. In stream
water, dissolved solids consist of calcium, chlorides, nitrate, phosphorus, iron, sulfur, and
other ions particles that will pass through a filter with pores of around 2 microns (0.002
cm) in size. Suspended solids include silt and clay particles, plankton, algae, fine organic
debris, and other particulate matter. These are particles that will not pass through a
2-micron filter.
The concentration of total dissolved solids affects the water balance in the cells of aquatic
organisms. An organism placed in water with a very low level of solids, such as distilled
water, will swell up because water will tend to move into its cells, which have a higher
concentration of solids. An organism placed in water with a high concentration of solids
will shrink somewhat because the water in its cells will tend to move out. This will in
turn affect the organism's ability to maintain the proper cell density, making it difficult to
keep its position in the water column. It might float up or sink down to a depth to which it
is not adapted, and it might not survive.
Higher concentrations of suspended solids can serve as carriers of toxics, which readily
cling to suspended particles. This is particularly a concern where pesticides are being
used on irrigated crops. Where solids are high, pesticide concentrations may increase well
beyond those of the original application as the irrigation water travels down irrigation
ditches. Higher levels of solids can also clog irrigation devices and might become so high
that irrigated plant roots will lose water rather than gain it.
A high concentration of total solids will make drinking water unpalatable and might have
an adverse effect on people who are not used to drinking such water. Levels of total
solids that are too high or too low can also reduce the efficiency of wastewater treatment
plants, as well as the operation of industrial processes that use raw water.
Total solids also affect water clarity. Higher solids decrease the passage of light through
water, thereby slowing photosynthesis by aquatic plants. Water will heat up more rapidly
and hold more heat; this, in turn, might adversely affect aquatic life that has adapted to a
-------
lower temperature regime.
Sources of total solids include industrial discharges, sewage, fertilizers, road runoff, and
soil erosion. Total solids are measured in milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Sampling and equipment considerations
Total solids are important to measure in areas where there are discharges from sewage
treatment plants, industrial plants, or extensive crop irrigation. In particular, streams and
rivers in arid regions where water is scarce and evaporation is high tend to have higher
concentrations of solids and are more readily affected by human introduction of solids
from land use activities.
Total solids measurements can be useful as an indicator of the effects of runoff from
construction, agricultural practices, logging activities, sewage treatment plant discharges,
and other sources. As with turbidity, concentrations often increase sharply during rainfall,
especially in developed watersheds. They can also rise sharply during dry weather if
earth-disturbing activities are occurring in or near the stream without erosion control
practices in place. Regular monitoring of total solids can help detect trends that might
indicate increasing erosion in developing watersheds. Total solids are related closely to
stream flow and velocity and should be correlated with these factors. Any change in total
solids over time should be measured at the same site at the same flow.
Total solids are measured by weighing the amount of solids present in a known volume
of sample. This is done by weighing a beaker, filling it with a known volume,
evaporating the water in an oven and completely drying the residue, and then weighing
the beaker with the residue. The total solids concentration is equal to the difference
between the weight of the beaker with the residue and the weight of the beaker without it.
Since the residue is so light in weight, the lab will need a balance that is sensitive to
weights in the range of 0.0001 gram. Balances of this type are called analytical or Mettler
balances, and they are expensive (around $3,000). The technique requires that the beakers
be kept in a desiccator, which is a sealed glass container that contains material that
absorbs moisture and ensures that the weighing is not biased by water condensing on the
beaker. Some desiccants change color to indicate moisture content.
The measurement of total solids cannot be done in the field. Samples must be collected
using clean glass or plastic bottles or Whirl-pak® bags and taken to a laboratory where
the test can be run.
How to collect and analyze samples
The procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for total solids consist of the
following tasks:
-------
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
Factory-sealed, disposable Whirl-pak® bags are easy to use because they need no
preparation. Reused sample containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be
cleaned and rinsed before the first sampling run and after each run by following the
procedure described in Method A in Task 1 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling
information. Be sure to let someone know where you are going and when you expect to
return.
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on how to collect
water samples using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Return samples and field sheets to the
lab/drop-off point for analysis.
Samples that are sent to a lab for total solids analysis must be tested within seven days of
collection. Keep the samples on ice or refrigerated.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18tned.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.9
Conductivity
What is conductivity and why is it important?
Conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to pass an electrical current.
Conductivity in water is affected by the presence of inorganic dissolved solids such as
chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate anions (ions that carry a negative charge) or
sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and aluminum cations (ions that carry a positive
charge). Organic compounds like oil, phenol, alcohol, and sugar do not conduct electrical
current very well and therefore have a low conductivity when in water. Conductivity is
also affected by temperature: the warmer the water, the higher the conductivity. For this
reason, conductivity is reported as conductivity at 25 degrees Celsius (25 C).
Conductivity in streams and rivers is affected primarily by the geology of the area
through which the water flows. Streams that run through areas with granite bedrock tend
to have lower conductivity because granite is composed of more inert materials that do
not ionize (dissolve into ionic components) when washed into the water. On the other
hand, streams that run through areas with clay soils tend to have higher conductivity
because of the presence of materials that ionize when washed into the water. Ground
water inflows can have the same effects depending on the bedrock they flow through.
Discharges to streams can change the conductivity depending on their make-up. A failing
sewage system would raise the conductivity because of the presence of chloride,
phosphate, and nitrate; an oil spill would lower the conductivity.
The basic unit of measurement of conductivity is the mho or Siemens. Conductivity is
measured in micromhos per centimeter (fimhos/cm) or microsiemens per centimeter
((is/cm). Distilled water has a conductivity in the range of 0.5 to 3 (imhos/cm. The
conductivity of rivers in the United States generally ranges from 50 to 1500 (jmhos/cm.
Studies of inland fresh waters indicate that streams supporting good mixed fisheries have
a range between 150 and 500 (jhos/cm. Conductivity outside this range could indicate
that the water is not suitable for certain species offish or macroinvertebrates. Industrial
waters can range as high as 10,000 (imhos/cm.
-------
Sampling and equipment Considerations
Conductivity is useful as a general measure of stream water quality. Each stream tends to
have a relatively constant range of conductivity that, once established, can be used as a
baseline for comparison with regular conductivity measurements. Significant changes in
conductivity could then be an indicator that a discharge or some other source of pollution
has entered a stream.
Conductivity is measured with a probe and a meter. Voltage is applied between two
electrodes in a probe immersed in the sample water. The drop in voltage caused by the
resistance of the water is used to calculate the conductivity per centimeter. The meter
converts the probe measurement to micromhos per centimeter and displays the result for
the user. NOTE: Some conductivity meters can also be used to test for total dissolved
solids and salinity. The total dissolved solids concentration in milligrams per liter (mg/L)
can also be calculated by multiplying the conductivity result by a factor between 0.55 and
0.9, which is empirically determined (see Standard Methods #2510, APHA 1992).
Suitable conductivity meters cost about $350. Meters in this price range should also
measure temperature and automatically compensate for temperature in the conductivity
reading. Conductivity can be measured in the field or the lab. In most cases, it is probably
better if the samples are collected in the field and taken to a lab for testing. In this way
several teams of volunteers can collect samples simultaneously. If it is important to test in
the field, meters designed for field use can be obtained for around the same cost
mentioned above.
If samples will be collected in the field for later measurement, the sample bottle should
be a glass or polyethylene bottle that has been washed in phosphate-free detergent and
rinsed thoroughly with both tap and distilled water. Factory-prepared Whirl-pak® bags
may be used.
How to sample
The procedures for collecting samples and analyzing conductivity consist of the
following tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
If factory-sealed, disposable Whirl-pak® bags are used for sampling, no preparation is
needed. Reused sample containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be
cleaned before the first run and after each sampling run by following Method A as
described in MEthod A in Table 1 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions.
-------
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, when sampling for
conductivity, include the following equipment:
• Conductivity meter and probe (if testing conductivity in the field)
• Conductivity standard appropriate for the range typical of the stream
• Data sheet for conductivity to record results
Be sure to let someone know where you are going and when you expect to return.
TASK 3 Collect the sample (if samples will be tested in the
lab)
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on how to collect
water samples using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Analyze the sample (field or lab)
The following procedure applies to field or lab use of the conductivity meter.
1. Prepare the conductivity meter for use according to the manufacturer's directions.
2. Use a conductivity standard solution (usually potassium chloride or sodium
chloride) to calibrate the meter for the range that you will be measuring. The
manufacturer's directions should describe the preparation procedures for the
standard solutio n.
3. Rinse the probe with distilled or deionized water.
4. Select the appropriate range beginning with the highest range and working down.
Read the conductivity of the water sample. If the reading is in the lower 10 percent
of the range, switch to the next lower range. If the conductivity of the sample ex
ceeds the range of the instrument, you may dilute the sample. Be sure to perform
the dilution according to the manufacturer's directions because the dilution might
not have a simple linear relationship to the conductivity.
5. Rinse the probe with distilled or deionized water and repeat step 4 until finished.
TASK 5 Return the samples and the field data sheets to
the lab/drop-off point.
Samples that are sent to a lab for conductivity analysis must be tested within 28 days of
collection. Keep the samples on ice or refrigerated.
-------
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18thed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Hach Company. 1992. Hack water analysis handbook. 2nd ed. Loveland, CO.
Mississippi Headwaters River Watch. 1991. Water quality procedures. Mississippi
Headwaters Board. March.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
5.10
Total Alkalinity
What is total alkalinity and why is it important?
Alkalinity is a measure of the capacity of water to neutralize acids (see pH description).
Alkaline compounds in the water such as bicarbonates (baking soda is one type),
carbonates, and hydroxides remove H+ ions and lower the acidity of the water (which
means increased pH). They usually do this by combining with the H+ ions to make new
compounds. Without this acid-neutralizing capacity, any acid added to a stream would
cause an immediate change in the pH. Measuring alkalinity is important in determining a
stream's ability to neutralize acidic pollution from rainfall or wastewater. It's one of the
best measures of the sensitivity of the stream to acid inputs.
Alkalinity in streams is influenced by rocks and soils, salts, certain plant activities, and
certain industrial wastewater discharges.
Total alkalinity is measured by measuring the amount of acid (e.g., sulfuric acid) needed
to bring the sample to a pH of 4.2. At this pH all the alkaline compounds in the sample
are "used up." The result is reported as milligrams per liter of calcium carbonate (mg/L
CaCO3).
Analytical and equipment considerations
For total alkalinity, a double endpoint titration using a pH meter (or pH "pocket pal") and
a digital titrator or buret is recommended. This can be done in the field or in the lab. If
you will analyze alkalinity in the field, it is recommended that you use a digital titrator
instead of a buret because the buret is fragile and more difficult to set up and use in the
field. The alkalinity method described below was developed by the Acid Rain Monitoring
Project of the University of Massachusetts Water Resources Research Center.
-------
Burets, titrators, and digital titrators for measuring
alkalinity
The total alkalinity analysis involves titration. In this test, titration is the addition of
small, precise quantities of sulfuric acid (the reagent) to the sample until the sample
reaches a certain pH (known as an endpoint). Th e amount of acid used corresponds to
the total alkalinity of the sample. Alkalinity can be measured using a buret, titrator, or
digital titrator (described below).
• A buret is a long, graduated glass tube with a tapered tip like a pipet and a valve
that is opened to allow the reagent to drip out of the tube. The amount of reagent
used is calculated by subtracting the original volume in the buret from t he volume
left after the endpoint has been reached. Alkalinity is calculated based on the
amount used.
• Titrators forcefully expel the reagent by using a manual or mechanical plunger.
The amount of reagent used is calculated by subtracting the original volume in the
titrator from the volume left after the endpoint has been reached. Alkalinity is then
calculated based on the amount used or is read directly from the titrator.
• Digital titrators have counters that display numbers. A plunger is forced into a
cartridge containing the reagent by turning a knob on the titrator. As the knob
turns, the counter changes in proportion to the amount of reagent used. Alkalinity
is then calculated based on the amount used. Digital titrators cost approximately
$90.
Digital titrators and burets allow for much more precision and uniformity in the amount
of titrant that is used.
How to collect and analyze samples
The field procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for pH and total alkalinity
consist of the following tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare the sample containers
Sample containers (and all glassware used in this procedure) must be cleaned and rinsed
before the first run and after each sampling run by following the procedure described
under Method A in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions. Remember to wear latex
gloves.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling date and
time, safety considerations, checking supplies, and checking weather and directions. In
addition to the standard sampling equipment and apparel, when sampling for pH and
alkalinity include the following equipment:
-------
• Digital titrator
• 100-mL graduated cylinder
• 250-mL beaker
• pH meter with combination temperature and reference electrode or pH "pocket pal"
• Sulfuric acid titration cartridge, 0.16 N
• Data sheet for pH and total alkalinity to record results
• Alkalinity voluette ampules standard, 0.500 N, for accuracy check
• Wash bottle with deionized water to rinse pH meter electrode
• Magnetic stirrer, if titrated in the lab
Be sure to calibrate the pH meter before you analyze a sample. The pH meter should be
calibrated prior to sample analysis and after every 25 samples according to the
instructions in the meter manual. Use two pH standard buffer solutions: 4.01 and 7.0. Fol
lowing are notes regarding buffers:
• The buffer solutions should be at room temperature when you calibrate the meter.
• Do not use a buffer after its expiration date.
• Always cap the buffers during storage to prevent contamination.
• Because buffer pH values change with temperature, the meter must have a built-in
temperature sensor that automatically standardizes the pH when the meter is
calibrated.
• Do not reuse buffer solutions!
Be sure to let someone know where you are going and when you expect to return.
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer to Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on how to collect
water samples using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags.
TASK 4 Measure total alkalinity (field or lab)
The following steps are for use of a digital titrator in the field or the lab. If you are using
a buret, consult Standard Methods (APHA, 1992).
Alkalinity is usually measured using sulfuric acid with a digital titrator. Sulfuric acid is
added to the water sample in measured amounts until the three main forms of alkalinity
(bicarbonate, carbonate, and hydroxide) are converted to carbonic acid. At pH 10,
hydroxide (if present) reacts to form water. At pH 8.3, carbonate is converted to
bicarbonate. At pH 4.5, it is certain that all carbonate and bicarbonate are converted to
carbonic aci d. Below this pH, the water is unable to neutralize the sulfuric acid and there
is a linear relationship between the amount of sulfuric acid added to the sample and the
change in the pH of the sample. So, additional sulfuric acid is added to the sample to
reduce the pH of 4.5 by exactly 0.3 pH units (which corresponds to an exact doubling of
-------
the pH) to a pH of 4.2. However, the exact pH at which the conversion of these bases
might have happened, or total alkalinity, is still unknown. This procedure uses an
equation derived from the slope of the line described above to extrapolate back to the
amount of sulfuric acid that was added to actually convert all the bases to carbonic acid.
The multiplier (0.1) then converts this to total alkalinity as mg/L CaCO3. The following
steps outline the procedures necessary to determine the alkalinity of your sample.
1. Insert a clean delivery tube into the 0.16 N sulfuric acid titration cartridge and
attach the cartridge to the titrator body.
2. Hold the titrator, with the cartridge tip pointing up, over a sink. Turn the delivery
knob to eject air and a few drops of titrant. Reset the counter to 0 and wipe the tip.
3. Measure the pH of the sample (see pH, section 5.4). If it is less than 4.5, go to step
9 below.
4. Insert the delivery tube into the beaker containing the sample. Turn the delivery
knob while magnetically stirring the beaker until the pH meter reads 4.5. Record
the number of digits used to achieve this pH. Do not reset the counter.
5. Continue titrating to a pH of 4.2 and record the number of digits.
6. Apply the following equation: Alkalinity (as mg/L CaCO3) = (2a - b) x 0.1
Where:
a = digits of titrant to reach pH 4.5
b = digits of titrant to reach pH 4.2 (including digits required to get to pH 4.5)
0.1 = digit multiplier for a 0.16 titration cartridge and a 100-mL sample
Example:
Initial pH of sample is 6.5.
It takes 108 turns to get to a pH of 4.5.
It takes another 5 turns to get to pH 4.2, for a total of 113 turns.
Alkalinity = ((2 x 108) - 113) x 0.1
= 10.3 mg/L
7. Record the results as mg/L alkalinity on the lab sheet.
8. Rinse the beaker with distilled water before the next sample.
9. If the pH of your water sample, prior to titration, is less than 4.5, proceed as
follows:
o Insert the delivery tube into the beaker containing the sample.
o Turn the delivery knob while swirling the beaker until the pH meter reads
exactly 0.3 pH units less than the initial pH of the sample.
o Record the number of digits used to achieve this pH.
o Apply the equation as in step 6, but a = 0 and b = the number of digits
required to reduce the initial pH exactly 0.3 pH units.
Example:
Initial pH of sample is 4.3.
-------
Enter "0" in the 4.5 column on the lab sheet.
Titrate to a pH of 0.3 units less than the initial pH in this cas 4.0.
It takes 10 digits to get to 4.0.
Enter this in the 4.2 column on the lab sheet and note that the pH endpoint is 4.0.
Alkalinity = (0 - 10) x 0.1 = -1.0.
o Record the results as mg/L alkalinity on the lab sheet.
10. Perform an accuracy check on the first field sample, halfway through the run, and
after analysis of the last sample as described below. Check the pH meter against
pH 7.0 and 4.01 buffers after every 10 samples.
TASK 5 Perform an accuracy check
This accuracy check should be performed on the first field sample titrated, again about
halfway through the field samples, and at the final field sample.
1. Snap the neck off an alkalinity voluette ampule standard, 0.500 N. Or if using a
standard solution from a bottle, pour a few milliliters of the standard into a clean
beaker.
2. Pipet 0.1 mL of the standard to the titrated sample (see above). Resume titration
back to the pH 4.2 endpoint. Record the number of digits needed.
3. Repeat using two more additions of 0.1 mL of standard. Titrate to the pH 4.2 after
each addition.
4. Each 0.1-mL addition of standard should require 250 additional digits of 0.16 N
titrant.
TASK 6 Return the field data sheets and samples to the
lab or drop-off point
Alkalinity samples must be analyzed within 24 hours of their collection. If the samples
cannot be analyzed in the field, keep the samples on ice and take them to the lab or
drop-off point as soon as possible.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18thed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Godfrey, P.J. \9SS.Acidrain in Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Water
Resources Research Center, Amherst, MA.
River Watch Network. 1992. Total alkalinity and pH field and laboratory procedures
(based on University of Massachusetts Acid Rain Monitoring Project). July 1.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
En
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
5.11
Fecal Bacteria
What are fecal bacteria and why are they important?
Members of two bacteria groups, coliforms and fecal streptococci, are used as indicators
of possible sewage contamination because they are commonly found in human and
animal feces. Although they are generally not harmful themselves, they indicate the
possible presence of pathogenic (disease-causing) bacteria, viruses, and protozoans that
also live in human and animal digestive systems. Therefore, their presence in streams
suggests that pathogenic microorganisms might also be present and that swimming and
eating shellfish might be a health risk. Since it is difficult, time-consuming, and
expensive to test directly for the presence of a large variety of pathogens, water is usually
tested for coliforms and fecal streptococci instead. Sources of fecal contamination to
surface waters include wastewater treatment plants, on-site septic systems, domestic and
wild animal manure, and storm runoff.
In addition to the possible health risk associated with the presence of elevated levels of
fecal bacteria, they can also cause cloudy water, unpleasant odors, and an increased
oxygen demand. (Refer to the section on dissolved oxygen.)
Indicator bacteria types and what they can tell you
The most commonly tested fecal bacteria indicators are total coliforms, fecal coliforms,
Escherichia coli, fecal streptococci, and enterococci. All but E. coli are composed of a
number of species of bacteria that share common characteristics such as shape, habitat, or
behavior; E. coli is a single species in the fecal coliform group.
Total coliforms are a group of bacteria that are widespread in nature. All members of the
total coliform group can occur in human feces, but some can also be present in animal
manure, soil, and submerged wood and in other places outside the human body. Thus, the
usefulness of total coliforms as an indicator of fecal contamination depends on the extent
to which the bacteria species found are fecal and human in origin. For recreational
waters, total coliforms are no longer recommended as an indicator. For drinking water,
total coliforms are still the standard test because their presence indicates contamination of
-------
a water supply by an outside source.
Fecal coliforms, a subset of total coliform bacteria, are more fecal-specific in origin.
However, even this group contains a genus, Klebsiella, with species that are not
necessarily fecal in origin. Klebsiella are commonly associated with textile and pulp and
paper mill wastes. Therefore, if these sources discharge to your stream, you might wish to
consider monitoring more fecal and human-specific bacteria. For recreational waters, this
group was the primary bacteria indicator until relatively recently, when EPA began
recommending E. coli and enterococci as better indicators of health risk from water
contact. Fecal coliforms are still being used in many states as the indicator bacteria.
E. coli is a species of fecal coliform bacteria that is specific to fecal material from
humans and other warm-blooded animals. EPA recommends E. coli as the best indicator
of health risk from water contact in recreational waters; some states have changed their
water quality standards and are monitoring accordingly.
Fecal streptococci generally occur in the digestive systems of humans and other
warm-blooded animals. In the past, fecal streptococci were monitored together with fecal
coliforms and a ratio of fecal coliforms to streptococci was calculated. This ratio was
used to determine whether the contamination was of human or nonhuman origin.
However, this is no longer recommended as a reliable test.
Enterococci are a subgroup within the fecal streptococcus group. Enterococci are
distinguished by their ability to survive in salt water, and in this respect they more closely
mimic many pathogens than do the other indicators. Enterococci are typically more
human-specific than the larger fecal streptococcus group. EPA recommends enterococci
as the best indicator of health risk in salt water used for recreation and as a useful
indicator in fresh water as well.
Which Bacteria Should You Monitor?
Which bacteria you test for depends on what you want to know. Do you want to know
whether swimming in your stream poses a health risk? Do you want to know whether
your stream is meeting state water quality standards?
Studies conducted by EPA to determine the correlation between different bacterial
indicators and the occurrence of digestive system illness at swimming beaches suggest
that the best indicators of health risk from recreational water contact in fresh water are E.
coli and enterococci. For salt water, enterococci are the best. Interestingly, fecal
coliforms as a group were determined to be a poor indicator of the risk of digestive
system illness. However, many states continue to use fecal coliforms as their primary
health risk indicator.
If your state is still using total or fecal coliforms as the indicator bacteria and you want to
know whether the water meets state water quality standards, you should monitor fecal
coliforms. However, if you want to know the health risk from recreational water contact,
the results of EPA studies suggest that you should consider switching to the E. coli or
enterococci method for testing fresh water. In any case, it is best to consult with the water
-------
quality division of your state's environmental agency, especially if you expect them to
use your data.
Sampling and equipment considerations
Bacteria can be difficult to sample and analyze, for many reasons. Natural bacteria levels
in streams can vary significantly; bacteria conditions are strongly correlated with rainfall,
and thus comparing wet and dry weather bacteria data can be a problem; many analytical
methods have a low level of precision yet can be quite complex; and absolutely sterile
conditions are required to collect and handle samples.
The primary equipment decision to make when sampling for bacteria is what type and
size of sample container you will use. Once you have made that decision, the same,
straightforward collection procedure is used regardless of the type of bacteria being
monitored. Collection procedures are described under "How to Collect Samples" below.
It is critical when monitoring bacteria that all containers and surfaces with which the
sample will come into contact be sterile. Containers made of either some form of plastic
or Pyrex glass are acceptable to EPA. However, if the containers are to be reused, they
must be sterilized using heat and pressure. The containers can be sterilized by using an
autoclave, which is a machine that sterilizes containers with pressurized steam. If using
an autoclave, the container material must be able to withstand high temperatures and
pressure. Plastic containers either high-density polyethylene or polypropylene might be
preferable to glass from a practical standpoint because they will better withstand
breakage. In any case, be sure to check the manufacturer's specifications to see whether
the container can withstand 15 minutes in an autoclave at a temperature of 121°C without
melting. (Extreme caution is advised when working with an autoclave.) Disposable,
sterile, plastic Whirl-pak® bags are used by a number of programs. The size of the
container will depend on the sample amount needed for the bacteria analysis method you
choose and the amount needed for other analyses.
There are two basic methods for analyzing water samples for bacteria:
1. The membrane filtration method involves filtering several different-sized portions
of the sample using filters with a standard diameter and pore size, placing each
filter on a selective nutrient medium in a petri plate, incubating the plates at a
specified temperature for a specified time period, and then counting the colonies
that have grown on the filter. This method varies for different bacteria types
(variations might include, for example, the nutrient medium type, the number and
types of incubations, etc.).
2. The multiple-tube fermentation method involves adding specified quantities of the
sample to tubes containing a nutrient broth, incubating the tubes at a specified
temperature for a specified time period, and then looking for the development of
gas and/or turbidity that the bacteria produce. The presence or absence of gas in
each tube is used to calculate an index known as the Most Probable Number
(MPN).
-------
Given the complexity of the analysis procedures and the equipment required, field
analysis of bacteria is not recommended. Bacteria can either be analyzed by the volunteer
at a well-equipped lab or sent to a state-certified lab for analysis. If you send a bacteria
sample to a private lab, make sure that it is certified by the state for bacteria analysis.
Consider state water quality labs, university and college labs, private labs, wastewater
treatment plant labs, and hospitals. You might need to pay these labs for analysis.
This manual does not address laboratory methods because several bacteria types are
commonly monitored and the methods are different for each type. For more information
on laboratory methods, refer to the references at the end of this section. If you decide to
analyze your samples in your own lab, be sure to carry out a quality assurance/quality
control program. Specific procedures are recommended in the section below.
How to Collect Samples
The procedures for collecting and analyzing samples for bacteria consist of the following
tasks:
TASK 1 Prepare sample containers
If factory-sealed, presterilized, disposable Whirl-pak® bags are used to sample, no
preparation is needed. Any reused sample containers (and all glassware used in this
procedure) must be rinsed and sterilized at 121 C for 1 5 minutes using an autoclave
before being used again for sampling.
TASK 2 Prepare before leaving for the sampling site
Refer to section 2.3 - Safety Considerations for details on confirming sampling data and
time, picking up equipment, reviewing safety considerations, and checking weather and
directions. In addition, to sample for coliforms you sh ould check your equipment as
follows:
• Whirl-pak® bags are factory-sealed and sterilized. Check to be sure that the seal
has not been removed.
• Bottles should have tape over the cap or some seal or marking to indicate that they
have been sterilized. If any of the sample bottles are not numbered, ask the lab
coordinator how to number them. Unless sample container s are to be marked with
the site number, do not number them yourself.
TASK 3 Collect the sample
Refer Task 2 in Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions for details on collecting a sample
using screw-cap bottles or Whirl-pak® bags. Remember to wash your hands thoroughly
after collecting samples suspected of containing fecal contamination. Also, be careful not
to touch your eyes, ears, nose, or mouth until you've washed your hands.
-------
Recommended field quality assurance/quality control procedures include:
• Field Blanks. These should be collected at 10 percent of your sample sites along
with the regular samples. Sterile water in sterilized containers should be sent out
with selected samplers. At a predetermined sample site, the sampler fills the usual
sample container with this sterile water. This is labeled as a regular sample, but
with a special notation (such as a "B") that indicates it is a field blank. It is then
analyzed with the regular samples. Lab analysis should result in "0" bacteria counts
for all blanks. Blanks are used to identify errors or contamination in sample
collection and analysis.
• Internal Field Duplicates. These should be collected at 10 percent of your sampling
sites along with the regular samples. A field duplicate is a duplicate stream sample
collected at the same time and at the same place either by the same sampler or by
another sampler. This is labeled as a regular sample, but with a special notation
(such as a "D") that indicates it is a duplicate. It is then analyzed with the regular
samples. Lab analysis should result in comparable bacteria counts per 100 mL for
duplicates and regular samples collected at the same site. Duplicates are used to
estimate sampling and laboratory analysis precision.
• External Field Duplicates. An external field duplicate is a duplicate stream sample
collected and processed by an independent (e.g., professional) sampler or team at
the same place at the same time as regular stream samples. It is used to estimate
sampling and laboratory analysis precision.
TASK 4 Return the field data sheets and the samples to
the lab or drop-off point
Samples for bacteria must be analyzed within 6 hours of collection. Keep the samples on
ice and take them to the lab or drop-off point as soon as possible.
TASK 5 Analyze the samples in the lab
This manual does not address laboratory analysis of water samples. Lab methods are
described in the references below (APHA, 1992; River Watch Network, 1991; USEPA,
1985). However, the lab you work with should carry out the following recommended
laboratory quality assurance/quality control procedures:
• Negative Plates result when the buffered rinse water (the water used to rinse down
the sides of the filter funnel during filtration) has been filtered the same way as a
sample. This is different from a field blank in that it contains reagents used in the
rinse water. There should be no bacteria growth on the filter after incubation. It is
used to detect laboratory bacteria contamination of the sample.
• Positive Plates result when water known to contain bacteria (such as wastewater
treatment plant influent) is filtered the same way as a sample. There should be
plenty of bacteria growth on the filter after incubation. Positive plates are used to
detect procedural errors or the presence of contaminants in the laboratory analysis
-------
that might inhibit bacteria growth.
• Lab Replicates. A lab replicate is a sample that is split into subsamples at the lab.
Each subsample is then filtered and analyzed. Lab replicates are used to obtain an
optimal number of bacteria colonies on filters for counting purposes. Usually,
subsamples of 100, 10, and 1 milliliter (mL) are filtered to obtain bacteria colonies
on the filter that can be reliably and accurately counted (usually between 20 and 80
colonies). The plate with the count between 20 and 80 colonies is selected for
reporting the results, and the count is converted to colonies per 100 mL.
• Knowns. A predetermined quantity of dehydrated bacteria is added to the reagent
water, which should result in a known result, within an acceptable margin of error.
• Outside Lab Analysis of Duplicate Samples. Either internal or external field
duplicates can be analyzed at an independent lab. The results should be comparable
to those obtained by the project lab.
References
APHA. 1992. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 18tned.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Hogeboom, T. Microbiologist, Vermont Environmental Conservation Laboratory,
Waterbury, VT. Personal communication.
River Watch Network. 1991. Escherichia coli (E. coli) membrane filter procedure
(adapted from USEPA Method 1103.1, 1985). Montpelier, VT. October.
USEPA. 1985. Test methods for Escherichia coli and enterococci in water by the
membrane filter procedure (Method #1103.1). EPA 600/4-85-076. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH.
USEPA. 1986. Bacteriological ambient water quality criteria for marine and fresh
recreational waters. EPA 440/5-84-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH.
Water Quality Sampling Field Data Sheet (PDF, 4.41 KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe
Acrobat Reader is available as a free download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is
also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
-------
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
OfficeofWater
United stales
Envlronrmnlai Protection
II' if $ 4* TK $14*4:$
ho me
Monitoring Water Quality
Figure 5.6
Back to Section 5.1 - Stream Flow
Determining Average Cross-Sectional Area (A)
Transect #1 (upstream)
Transect #2 (downstream)
Interal width
(feet)
A to = 2.0
B
B to = 2.0
C
Cto = 2.0
D
D to = 2.0
E
Depth
(feet)
1.0 (atB)
0.8 (atC)
0.5 (atD)
0.0 (shoreline)
Interal width
(feet)
A = 2.5
to
B
B = 2.5
to
C
C = 2.5
to
D
D = 2.5
to
E
Depth
(feet)
1.1
1.0
0.4
0.0
(atB)
(atC)
(atD)
(shoreline)
Totals 8.0 2.3
Average depth = 2.3/4 = 0.575 feet
Cross-sectional area of Transect #1
= Total width X Average depth
= 8.0 ft X 0.575
= 4.60 ft2
10.0 2.5
Average depth = 2.5/4 = 0.625 feet
Cross-sectional area of Transect #2
= Total width X Average depth
= 10.0 ft X 0.625
= 6.25 ft2
Average area = (Cross-sectional area of Transect #1 + Cross-sectional area of Transect #2)12
= (4.60ft2 + 6.25ft2)/2
=5.42 ft2
area
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
-------
5-EPA
Office of Water
ynlrtd Slates
Environmental Praltcl&ti
Monitoring Water Quality
Method
Back to Chapter 5 - Water Quality Conditions
Location
(Lab or Comments
Field)
Dissolved Oxygen (DO)
Winkler with eye dropper
Winkler with digital
titrator or buret
Meter
Either
Either
Field
If lab, the
sample is fixed
in field and
titrated in lab;
must be
measured within
8 hours of
collection.
The meter is
fragile and must
be handled
carefully.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Winkler with eye dropper
Winkler with digital
titrator or buret
1 st part -
Either
2nd part -
Lab
1 st part -
Either
2nd part -
Lab
If lab, the
sample is fixed
in field and
titrated in lab;
must be
measured within
6 hours of
collection.
If lab, the
sample is fixed
in field and
titrated in lab;
must be
measured within
6 hours of
collection.
5.2
Summary
of
chemical
monitoring
methods
Volunteers
can
measure
some
parameters
in the field
or in the
laboratory.
-------
Meter
1st part -
Either
2nd part -
Lab
The meter is
fragile and must
be handled
carefully; must
be measured
within 6 hours
of collection.
Temperature
Thermometer
Field
Cannot be done
in the lab.
pH
Color comparator
pH "Pocket Pal"
Meter
Either
Either
Either
If lab, measured
ASAP within 2
hours of
collection.
If lab, measured
ASAP within 2
hours of
collection.
If lab, measured
ASAP within 2
hours of
collection.
Turbidity
Meter
Either
If lab, measured
ASAP within 24
hours of
collection.
Total Orthophosphate
Ascorbic Acid w/ color
comparator
Ascorbic acid w/
spectophotometer
Either
Either
If lab, measured
within 48 hours
of collection.
If lab, measured
within 48 hours
of collection.
Nitrate
Cadmium reduction w/
color comparator
Either
If lab, measured
within 48 hours
of collection.
-------
Cadmium reduction w/
spectrophotometer
Either
If lab, measured
within 48 hours
of collection.
Total Solids
Oven drying/weighing
Lab
Must be
measured within
7 days of
collection.
Conductivity
Meter
Either
If lab, measured
ASAP within 28
days of
collection.
Total Alkalinity
Titration
Either
If lab, measured
within 24 hours
of collection.
Fecal Bacteria
Membrane filtration
Lab
Must be
measured within
6 hours of
collection.
Office of Wetlands. Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search I Comments
-------
i Environmental
Office of Water
^^^^^^^mmm^: : • •-••<,'*,
Chapter 6
Managing and Presenting Monitoring Data
6.1 - Managing Volunteer Data
6.2 - Presenting the Data
6.3 - Producing Reports
It is hard to overemphasize the importance of having established methods of handling
volunteer data, analyzing that data, and presenting results effectively to volunteers, the
public, and water resource decision-makers. Without these tools and processes, the data
that volunteers and program managers have labored hard to collect are virtually useless,
and the program will surely fail to meet its goals.
This chapter addresses data management and data presentation. Members of the program
planning committee will need to make many decisions on these issues before the first
field data sheet is filled out by the program's first volunteer. In particular, they should
consult any potential data users such as state water quality agencies or county planning
boards regarding their own data needs. Data users will be particularly concerned about:
• Procedures used to verify and check the raw volunteer data.
• Databases and software used to manage the data.
• Analytical procedures used to convert the raw data into findings and conclusions.
• Reporting formats.
Data users may, for example, be able to offer concrete suggestions about databases and
presentation formats that will make the data more accessible to them. To ensure that all
questions about the validity of the data can be answered, the program planning committee
should develop and implement a quality assurance/quality control plan designed to
minimize data collection errors, weed out data that fail to meet the program's standards,
and effectively analyze and present the results. This plan should identify key personnel
with responsibilities for data management and data analysis and clearly indicate all the
steps the program will take to handle the data.
Unfortunately, volunteers and program coordinators seldom recognize the importance of
this aspect of a volunteer monitoring program. It tends to be considered "drudge" work
-------
assigned to one or two technically inclined people. However, that attitude is seriously out
of date. Program organizers should make every effort to involve a range of volunteers
and program staff in all aspects of data management and presentation. Sufficient time
should be budgeted to the tasks that are involved. People who produce the reports should
be acknowledged. After all, it is the final reports that will be reviewed by stream
management decision-makers, not the field data sheets. No other tasks are more
important to the success of the volunteer stream monitoring program.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
6.1
Managing Volunteer Data
The following steps will help ensure that the data collected by volunteers are well
managed, credible, and of value to potential data users.
Review Field Data Sheets
The volunteer program coordinator or designated analyst should screen and review the
field data sheets as they are received. This involves some basic "reality checks."
Questions that should be kept in mind include the following:
• Are the results as might be anticipated, or are they highly unexpected? If
unexpected, are they still within the realm of possibility?
For example, can the kit or technique the volunteer used actually produce results
like that? Does the volunteer offer any possible explanations for the results (e.g., a
sewage treatment plant malfunction had been recently reported) or corollary
informatio n (e.g., a fish kill has been observed along with the extremely low
dissolved oxygen readings)? Also check for consistency between similar
parameters. For example, total dissolved solids and conductivity should track
together—if one goes up, so should the other. So should total solids and turbidity.
• Are there outliers? (Findings that differ radically from past data or other data
from similar sites.)
Values that are off by a factor of 10 or 100 should be questioned. Follow up on any
data that seems suspect. If you can't come up with an explanation for why the
results are so unusual, but they are still within the realm of possibility, you may
want to flag the data as questionable. Ask an experienced volunteer or program
staffer to sample at that site as a backup until uncertainties are resolved, or work
with the volunteer to verify that proper sampling and analytical protocols are being
foil owed.
• Are the field data sheets complete?
If a volunteer is consistently leaving a section of the sheet incomplete, follow up
and ask why. Instructions may not always be easily understood. All sheets should
-------
include site location and identification, name of the volunteer, date, time, an d
weather conditions.
• Are all measurements reported in the correct units?
You should minimize the chance for error by including on the data form itself any
equations needed to convert measurements, and specify on the form what units
should be used. Check the math. All field data sheets should be kept on file in the
event that findings are brought into question at a later date.
Review Information in Your Database
Once volunteer data enters a computerized database, it can take on a life of its own. It is a
phenomenon of human nature that data suddenly seem more believable once
computerized. Therefore, be sure to carefully screen information as soon as yo u enter it
into a database. Then review a printout (preferably with a fresh pair of eyes) against the
original field data sheets. One way to minimize transcription errors is to design the
computer input screens to look like the field data forms.
As a further check, you can run some simple calculations like determining medians and
means to make sure no errors have slipped through. (If the median and the mean are very
different, an outlier may be skewing the results.) Again, if you uncover unusual data
points that cannot be explained by backup information on the field data sheets or the
comment field in the database, flag the data as questionable until it can be verified.
Review Your Final Results
Once volunteer monitoring data has been entered into a database, the next step is to
generate reports on the findings of the data. Even at this stage you should continue to
look for inconsistencies and problems. For example, you should:
• Review findings against previous years' data.
• Look for outliers on graphs and maps.
• Not remove data just because you don't like it, but do investigate findings that are
unusual or can't be explained.
By the time you present your final results to your volunteers or other data users, you
should feel fully confident that you have assembled the best possible picture of water
quality conditions in your study streams.
Develop a Coding System
A coding system will help simplify the tracking and recording of data. Make sure,
however, that the system you create is easily understood and simple to use. Codes
developed for sample sites, parameters, and other information on field and lab sheets
shoul d parallel the codes you use in your database. If you will be sharing your
information with a state or local natural resource agency, you may want your coding
-------
system to match or complement the agency system.
Sample Sites: Because sample sites tend to change over time, it is important to have a site
numbering system that accommodates change. A good convention to follow is to use a
site coding system that includes an abbreviation of the waterbody and a s ite number
(e.g., QR020 for a site on the Connecticut River). For consistency, you might choose to
start the site numbers at the downstream end of the stream and increase them as you
move upstream (e.g., the first Connecticut River site would be CtROlO, the second
CtR020, etc.). Leave extra numbers between sites to allow for your program's future
expansion.
Water Quality Parameters: It is also important to develop a coding system for each of the
water quality parameters you are testing. These are the codes you will use in the database
to identify and extract results. To keep the amount of clerical wor k to a minimum,
abbreviate without losing the ability to distinguish parameters from one another. For
example, EC could represent E. coli bacteria and FC fecal coliform bacteria.
Spreadsheets, Databases, and Mapping Software
Today's computer software includes a variety of spreadsheet and database packages that
allow you to sort, manipulate, and perform statistical analyses on the data you have
entered into the computer. For most applications, spreadsheets are adequate and hav e the
advantage of being relatively simple to use. Most spreadsheet packages have graphics
capabilities that will allow you to plot your data onto a graph of your choice (i.e., bar,
line, or pie chart). Examples of common spreadsheet software packages are Lotus 123,
Excel, and Quattro Pro.
Database software may be more difficult to master and usually lack the graphics
capabilities of spreadsheet software. If you manage large amounts of data, however, a
database is almost a necessity. Using a databa se, you can store and manipulate very large
data sets without sacrificing speed. The database can also relate records in one file to
records in another file. This allows you to break your data up into smaller, more easily
managed files that can work toget her as though they were one.
If you use database software for storage and retrieval, you may still want to use a
spreadsheet or other program with graphics capabilities. Many spreadsheet and database
software packages are compatible and will allow you to transport sets of data back a nd
forth with relative ease. Very large data sets can be organized and manipulated in a
database. Specific parts of the data (such as results for a particular metric from all stations
and all sampling events) can then be transported into the spreadsheet, statistically
analyzed, and graphically displayed. Examples of popular database software packages are
dBase, FileMaker Pro, and FoxPro.
An effective way to display your data is on a map of the stream or watershed. This clearly
illustrates the relationship between land uses and the quality of water, habitat, and
biological communities. This type of graphic display can be used to effectivel y show the
correlation between specific activities or land uses and the impacts they have on the
-------
ecosystem. Simple personal computer-based mapping packages are available. They allow
you to enter layers of data and conduct spatial analysis of that data.
Systems that allow you to map and manipulate various layers of information (such as
water quality data, land use information, county boundaries, or geologic conditions) are
known as Geographic Information Systems (GIS). They can vary from simple systems r
un on personal computers to sophisticated and very powerful systems that run on large
mainframes. For any GIS application, you need to know the coordinates of your sample
sites—either their latitude and longitude, or some alternate system such as an EPA River
Reach File identifier. You can also locate your sites on a topographic map that can be
digitized on to an electronic map of the watershed. Once these points have been
established, you can link your database to the points on the map, query your data base,
and create graphic displays of the data.
Powerful GIS applications typically require expensive hardware, software, and technical
training. Any volunteer program interested in GIS applications should consider working
in partnership with other organizations such as universities, natural resource a gencies, or
large nonprofit groups that can provide access to a GIS.
Many people are capable of writing their own programs to manipulate and display data.
The disadvantage of using a "homegrown" software program, however, is that if its
author leaves, so too does all knowledge about how the program works. Commercial
software, on the other hand, comes with consumer services that provide over-the-phone
help and instructions, user's guides, replacement guarantees, and updates as the company
improves its product. Also, most commercial programs are developed to easily import
and export data in standard formats. This feature is important because if you want to
share data with other programs or organizations all you need are compatible software
programs.
STORET
EPA's national water and biological data storage and retrieval system,
STORET, is being modernized and will be available in 1998-1999. Volunteer
programs are encouraged to enter their data into the modernized STORET.
Individual systems will "feed" data to a centralized file server which will
permit national data analyses and through which data can be shared among
organizations. A specific set of quality control measures will be required for
any data entered into the system to aid in data sharing. For more information,
see the EPA web page at www.epa.gov/owow/STORET/.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
-------
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
United Slales
Environm«ii1al Protection
Monitoring Water Quality
6.2
Presenting the Data
When presenting numerical data, one of your chief goals should be to maintain the attention and interest of your
audience. This is very difficult using tables filled with numbers. Most people will not be interested in the absolute
values of each parameter at each sampling site. Rather, they will want to know the bottom line for each site (e.g.,
is it good or bad) and seasonal and year to year trends.
Graphs and charts, therefore, are typically the best way to present volunteer data. Take care, however, that your
graphs "fit" your audience and are neither too technical nor too simplistic.
Habitat scores as a percent of reference
condition at sites #1 and #2 for 1992-1994
100-
Graphs and Charts
Graphs can be used to display the summarized results of large
data sets and to simplify complicated issues and findings. The
three basic types of graphs that are typically used to present
volunteer monitoring data are:
• Bar graph
• Line graph
• Pie chart
Bar and line graphs are typically used to show results, such as
bioassessment scores, along a vertical or yaxis for a
corresponding variable (such as sampling date or site) which is
marked along the horizontal or xaxis. These types of graphs can
also have two vertical axes, one on each side, with two sets of
results shown in relation to each other and to the variable along
the xaxis.
Bar Graph
A bar graph uses columns with heights that represent the value of
the data point for the parameter being plotted. Fig. 6.1 is an
example using fictional data from Volunteer Creek.
Line Graph
A line graph is constructed by connecting the data points with a line. It can be effectively used for depicting
changes over time or space. This type of graph places more emphasis on trends and the relationship among data
points and less emphasis on any p articular data point.
Fig. 6.2 is an example of a line graph again using fictional data from Volunteer Creek.
Pie Chart
Pie charts are used to compare categories within the data set to the whole. The proportion of each category is
represented by the size of the wedge. Pie charts are popular due to their simplicity and clarity. (See Fig. 6.3)
Site #1
Site #2
Figure 6,1
Example of a bar graph displaying biological data
Graphing Tips
-------
Regardless of which graphic style you choose, follow
these rules to ensure you use them most effectively.
• Each graph should have a clear purpose. The
graph should be easy to interpret and should relate
directly to the content of the text of a document or
the script of a presentation.
• The data points on a graph should be
proportional to the actual values so as not to
distort the meaning of the graph. Labeling should
be clear and accurate and the data values should
be easily interpreted from the scales. Do not
overcrowd t he points or values along the axes. If
there is a possibility of misinterpretation,
accompany the graph with a table of the data.
• Keep it simple. The more complex the graph, the
greater the possibility for misinterpretation.
• Limit the number of elements. Pie charts should be
limited to five or six wedges, the bars in a bar
graph should fit easily, and the lines in a line
graph should be limited to three or less.
• Consider the proportions of the graph and expand
the elements to fill the dimensions, thereby
creating a balanced effect. Often, a horizontal
format is more visually appealing and makes
labeling easier. Try not to use abbreviations that
are not obvious to someone who is unfamiliar
with the program.
• Create titles that are simple, yet adequately
describe the information portrayed in the graph.
• Use a legend if one is necessary to describe the
categories within the graph. Accompanying
captions may also be needed to provide an
adequate description of the elements.
Summary Statistics
Summary statistics can reduce a very large data set to a
few numerical values that can then be easily described
and analyzed. Such statistics include the mean and
standard deviation—two of the most frequently used
descriptors of environmental data.
Textbook statistics commonly assume that if a parameter
is measured many times under the same conditions, then
the measurement values will be randomly distributed
around the average with more values clustering near the
average than further away. In this i deal situation, a graph
of the frequency of each measure plotted against its
magnitude should yield a bell-shaped or normal curve.
The mean and the standard deviation determine the
height and breadth of this curve, respectively.
The mean is simply the sum of all the measurement
values divided by the number of measurements. This
June phosphorus concentrations at Sites #1 and
#2 from 1991-1997
0.2D
— 0.1S
E,
Q.
0.00
0.10 *
0.05 -•--,
6/91 6/92 6/93 6/94 6/95 5/96 6/97
Summary of water quality ratings for Volunteer
Creek
E3 F*r
E3 Poef
(total no. of stations =5 2)
-------
statistic is a measure of location and in a normal curve .,.;.,..••..., .,..,., . ., ...., ,,. . .
marks the highest point at the center of the bell.
The standard deviation, on the other hand, describes the variability of the data points around the mean. Very
similar measurement values will have a small standard deviation while widely scattered data will have a much
larger standard deviation.
While both the mean and standard deviation are quite useful in describing stream data, often the actual measures
do not fit a normal distribution. Other statistics often come into play to describe the data. Some data are skewed
in one direction or the oth er. Other data may have a flattened bell shape.
It is important to note that biological information often does not follow normal, bell-shaped distribution. This is
because biological communities are dynamic, complex, and interdependent systems; many factors influence them,
and these cannot be statistica lly predicted. For example, bioassessment scores plotted against habitat assessment
scores will be at their best when habitat quality is at its best. For data that is non-normally distributed, the mean
and the standard deviation are not appropriate summary statistics.
For describing non-normally distributed data, it is best to use statistics that can convey the information for a
variety of conditions and which are not overly influenced by the data points at the extremes of the distribution.
The median and the interquart ile range are two statistics that are commonly used to describe the central tendency
and the spread around the median, respectively. These statistics are derived by placing the data points in order of
value from lowest to highest. The median is simply the value that is in the middle of the data set. The interquartile
range is the difference between the value at the 75 percent level and the value at the 25 percent level.
The best method for presenting this type of data is called a box and whisker plot. One simple box and whisker
plot will graphically display the following information:
• Median
• Variability of the data around the median
• Skew of the data
• Range of the data
• Size of the data set
Statistical software packages for computers will easily construct box and whisker plots. You can construct these
plots by following procedure shown below:
1. Order the data from the lowest to the highest.
2. Plot the lowest and highest values on the graph as short horizontal lines. These are the extreme values of
the data set and represent the data range.
3. Determine the 75 percent value and the 25 percent value of the data set. These values define the
interquartile range and are represented by the location of the top and bottom lines of the box.
4. The horizontal length of the lines that define the top and bottom lines of the box (the box width) can be
used as a relative indication of the size of the data set. For example, the box width that describes a data set
of 20 values can be displayed twice as wide as a data set of 10 values. Any proportional scheme can be
used as long as it is consistently applied.
5. Close the box by drawing vertical lines that connect to the ends of the horizontal lines.
6. Plot the median inside the box.
Fig. 6.4 is an example depicting the extreme values, interquartile range, and median of biosurvey metric scores
from 52 sites sampled in Volunteer Creek in June, 1995.
Maps
Displaying the results of your monitoring data on a map can be a very effective way of showing the data and
helping people understand what it means. A map shows the location of sample sites in relation to 1 and features,
such as cities, wastewater treatment plants, farmland, and tributaries that may have an effect on water quality.
Because a map also displays the stream's relationship to neighborhoods, parks a nd recreational areas, it can help
to develop concern for the stream and strengthens interest in protecting it.
-------
Choosing a Map
It is best to have two types of maps. One
should be a working map with a lot of detail.
The other should be used for display
purposes. The working map should include
important features such as:
• Stream and its tributaries
• Wetlands
• Lakes and ponds
• Cultural features such as roads
• Rail and power lines; municipal
boundaries
• Some indication of land use patterns
and vegetation.
The map should be of a scale large enough
to add the location of sample sites.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute
quads (scale of 1:24,000; 1 in. = 2,000 ft)
are available with and without topographic
contours (elevation markings). These maps
are available for most of the United States.
Box Plot of Total Metric Scores from June,
1995
(No. of sites =5 2)
25
o
o
00
o
20-
15-
10-
5-
Maximum Value
124}
75% value
f SO I
Median
value
l'7 4,1
2i% value
(SI
Minimum value
12)
Example of a box plot
The USGS maps are particularly useful if
your information will be incorporated into a geographic information system (GIS), since many of these systems
use the USGS maps as base maps. For your data to be used in a GIS, it is likely that you will have to provide the
latitude and longitude of your sample sites, which can be obtained by using the grid markings on the USGS
topographic maps. Several different coordinate systems are marked, including standard latitude/longitude and the
Universal Transmercator coordinates. For assistance in learning how to use these coordinate markings, talk to the
local USGS office or someone in the geography department at a university. It may also be possible for the GIS
office you work with you to "digitize" the maps, thus saving you the trouble of trying to calculate the coordinates.
The display map is best used to illustrate your program results at public meetings or in reports. This map should
be simpler than the detailed map and show only principal features such as roads, municipal boundaries, and
waterways. It should have sufficient detail and scale to show the location of sample sites, and have space for
summary information about each of the sample sites. Commercial road atlases and county or town road maps
available from state transportation departments are examples of the types of maps that can be used for display
purposes (See Fig. 6.5).
-------
RAINBOW
3
RK£ LAKE
CLUSTER
DEVEREUX
STA
BRIARLYNNr,
ESfS
SHADOWALK
Creating a Display Map
Some suggestions for using a map to display your data include:
• Keep the amount of information presented on each map to a minimum. Do not try to put so much on one
map that it becomes visually complicated and difficult to read or understand. Use another map to display a
different layer or "view" of the data. For example, if there are several dates for which you wish to display
sampling results, use one map for each date.
• Clearly label the map and provide an explanation of how to interpret it. If you need a long and complicated
explanation, you may want to present the data differently. If you have reached a clear conclusion, state the
conclusion on the map. For example, if a map shows that tributaries are cleaner than the mainstem, use that
information as the subtitle of the map.
• Provide a key to the symbols that are used on the map.
• Rather than packing lots of information into a small area of the map, use a "blowup" or enlargement of the
area elsewhere on the map to adequately display the information.
-------
Use symbols that vary in size and pattern to represent the magnitude of results. For example, a site with a
fecal coliform level of 10 per 100 milliliters could be a light gray circle one-sixteenth inch diameter while a
site with a level of 200 per 100 milliliters would be a dark gray circle one-quarter inch diameter. Start by
finding the highest and lowest values, assign diameters and patterns to those and then fill in steps along the
way. For the above example you might have four ranges: 0 to 99, 100 to 199, 200 to 500 and 500 +.
Maps on Demand
EPA provides a World Wide Web service known as Maps on Demand that
allows users to generate maps displaying environmental information for
anywhere in the U.S. (except Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands).
Types of information that can be mapped include EPA-regulated facilities,
demographic information, roads, streams, and drinking water sources. Maps
of varying scales can be generated on the site (latitude and longitude), zip
code, county, and basin levels. Submit your request and email address, and
after a brief wait, you will be able to view your map on-line or download it.
Maps on Demand can be reached through EPA's Surf Your Watershed
homepage at www. epa. gov/surf2/locate/.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home I Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
/*\ff* if W/ i
(Jlnce or Water
^^^^^^^^^^^^^b. n:: :: / *• .>i".l.v ' i" <'
Water
6.3
Producing Reports
On a regular basis, a successful stream volunteer monitoring program should produce
reports that summarize key findings to volunteers; data users such as state water quality
agencies, and local planning boards; and/or the general public, including the media. State
water quality agencies will require detailed reports, whereas shorter and less technical
summaries are more appropriate for the general public. All reports should be subjected to
the review process prescribed by your Quality Assurance Project Plan.
Professional Report
In a report designed for water quality or planning professionals, you should go into detail
about:
• The purpose of the study
• Who conducted it
• How it was funded
• The methods used
• The quality control measures taken
• Your interpretation of the results
• Your conclusions and recommendations
• Further questions that have arisen as a result of the study.
Graphics, tables and maps may be fairly sophisticated. Be sure to include the raw data in
an appendix and note any problems encountered.
Lay Report
A report for the general public should be short and direct. It is very important to write in
a nontechnical style and to include definitions for terms and concepts that may be
unfamiliar to the lay person. Simple charts, summary tables, and maps with
accompanying explanations can be especially useful. This type of report should include a
brief description of the program, the purpose of the monitoring, an explanation of the
parameters that were monitored, the location of sample sites, a summary of the results,
and any recommendations that may have been made.
-------
Both types of reports should acknowledge the volunteers and the sources of funding.
Publicizing the Report
Develop a strategy for distributing and publicizing your report before it is completed. Be
sure the planning committee is confident about the data and comfortable with the
statements and conclusions that have been included in the document. When the report is
released to the public, you will need to be prepared to respond to questions regarding the
data and your interpretation of that data.
Some ideas for distributing the results and informing the public include the following:
• Mailing the report. If you have access to a mailing list of people who are interested
in your stream, mail the report with a cover letter that summarizes the major
findings of the study. The cover letter should be brief and enticing so that the
recipient will be curious enough to read the report. If you want people to take some
kind of action, such as supporting the expenditure of public funds to upgrade a
sewage treatment plant, you may want to ask for their support in the cover letter. If
you do not have an extensive mailing list, perhaps other organizations that share
your goals would be willing to supply you with their list. Be sure to also send the
report to the newspapers, radio and television stations, and state and federal
agencies.
• Speaking tour. You may also want to develop an oral presentation (with slides,
overheads, etc.) that could be offered to groups such as the Chamber of Commerce,
Rotary clubs, conservation organizations, schools, and government entities. Your
presentation could even be videotaped for distribution to a wider audience.
• Public meetings. You may want to schedule a series of public meetings that
highlight the program and its findings and recommendations. At the meetings,
distribute the report, answer questions and tell your audience how they can get
involved. These meetings can also help you recruit more volunteers.
Be sure to schedule the meetings at times when people are more likely to attend
(i.e., weekday evenings, weekend days) and avoid periods when people are
normally busy or on vacation. Invite the media and publicize the meetings in
newspaper calendars, send press releases to newspapers, radio and television
stations and other organizations, and ask volunteers to distribute flyers at grocery
stores, city hall, etc.
• News releases. Writing and distributing a news release is a cost-effective means of
informing the public about the results and accomplishments of your program.
Develop a mailing list of newspapers, radio and television stations, and
organizations that solicit articles for publication. Send the news release to
volunteers and others who are interested in publicizing the monitoring program.
The first page of your news release should feature the sponsoring organization's
name and logo to clearly designate the source of the news. Include a headline, the
-------
date, a contact name and number, and whether the story is for release immediately
or a later date. The first paragraph should begin with a dateline (the city of origin
for the event or story described in the release) and include the essentials: who,
what, where, when, and why and a synopsis of the most important elements of the
story. The second paragraph should contain the second most important facts, the
third paragraph the third most important points and so on. Editors tend to chop off
the last paragraphs if short on space. Therefore, be sure to state your major points
early in the press release.
• News conferences. If your report contains some real news, or if it has led to a
significant event, (e.g., the mayor or city council has recognized the value of the
report and issued a statement of support) hold a news conference. Timing and
location are important. Early in the day, but after 10 a.m. is good (most camera
crews start their workday at 9 a.m.) because it allows plenty of time to edit the tape
before the noon news broadcast. You may want to consider timing the conference
so that a TV station could broadcast it live at the noon or the evening news show.
For the conference, choose a place that has good visuals, such as location along the
river or water body that you have been studying, at your headquarters where
volunteers can be shown working in the background or at a recognition gathering
for volunteers.
• Other publicity. Be creative in getting your report and message out. Try writing
op-ed articles for local or statewide papers, writing letters to the editor, producing
radio feeds (a recording of the group's leader played over the phone to a radio
station), issuing media advisories, and even advertising in publications. For more
help on getting your message across, consult the references cited below.
References and Further Reading
Byrnes, J. 1994. How Citizen Monitoring Data Became a Part of Community Life.
Volunteer Monitor. 6(1): 17.
Ely, E. 1992. (ed.) Monitoring for Advocacy. Volunteer Monitor. 4(1) Spring 1992.
Ely, E. 1992. (ed.) Building Credibility. Volunteer Monitor. 4(2) Fall 1992.
Ely, E. 1994. Putting Data to Use. Volunteer Monitor. 6(1):11.
Ely, E. 1995. (ed.) Managing and Presenting Your Data. Volunteer Monitor. 7(1) Spring
1995.
Sweeney, K. 1989. The Media Director: Patagonia's Guide for Environmental Groups,
Ventura, CA.
Tufte, E.R. 1991. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Graphics Press,
Cheshire, Connecticut.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
Office of Water
Water
Appendix A:
Glossary
accuracy - a measure of how close repeated trials are to the desired target.
acidity - a measure of the number of free hydrogen ions (H+) in a solution that can
chemically react with other substances.
alkalinity - a measure of the negative ions that are available to react and neutralize free
hydrogen ions. Some of most common of these include hydroxide (OH), sulfate (SO4),
phosphate (PO4), bicarbonate (HCO3) and carbonate (CO3)
ambient - pertaining to the current environmental condition.
assemblage - the set of related organisms that represent a portion of a biological
community (e.g., benthic macroinvertebrates).
benthic - pertaining to the bottom (bed) of a water body.
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) - the amount of oxygen consumed by
microorganisms as they decompose organic materials in water.
biological criteria - numerical values or narrative descriptions that depict the biological
integrity of aquatic communities in that state. May be listed in state water quality
standards.
buret - a graduated glass tube used for measuring and releasing small and precise
amounts of liquid.
channel - the section of the stream that contains the main flow.
channelization - the straightening of a stream; this often is a result of human activity.
chemical constituents - chemical components that are part of a whole.
cobble - medium-sized rocks (210 inches) that are found in a stream bed.
combined sewer overflow (CSO) - sewer systems in which sanitary waste and
stormwater are combined in heavy rains; this is especially common in older cities. The
-------
discharge from CSOs is typically untreated.
community - the whole of the plant and animal population inhabiting a given area.
culvert - man-made construction that diverts the natural flow of water.
dframe net - a fine mesh net that is attached to a pole and used for sampling. It
resembles a butterfly net.
deionized water - water that has had all of the ions (atoms or molecules) other than
hydrogen and oxygen removed.
designated uses - state-established desirable uses that waters should support, such as
fishing, swimming, and aquatic life. Listed in state water quality standards.
dissolved oxygen (DO) - oxygen dissolved in water and available for living organisms to
use for respiration.
distilled water - water that has had most of its impurities removed.
effluent - wastewater discharge.
dredge - to remove sediments from the stream bed to deepen or widen the channel.
ecoregion - geographic areas that are distinguished from others by ecological
characteristics such as climate, soils, geology, and vegetation.
embeddedness - the degree to which rocks in the streambed are surrounded by sediment.
emergent plants - plants rooted underwater, but with their tops extending above the
water.
Erlenmeyer flask - a flask having a wide bottom and a smaller neck and mouth that is
used to mix liquids.
eutrophication - the natural and artificial addition of nutrients to a waterbody, which
may lead to depleted oxygen concentrations. Eutrophication is a natural process that is
frequently accelerated and intensified by human activities.
floating plants - plants that grow free floating, rather than being attached to the stream
bed.
flocculent (floe) - a mass of particles that form into a clump as a result of a chemical
reaction.
glide/run - section of a stream with a relatively high velocity and with little or no
turbulence on the surface of the water.
graduated cylinder - a cylinder used to measure liquids that is marked in units.
gross morphological features - large obvious identifying physical characteristics of an
organism.
-------
headwaters - the origins of a stream.
hypoxia - depletion of dissolved oxygen in an aquatic system.
impairment - degradation.
impoundment - a body of water contained by a barrier, such as a dam.
inert - not chemically or physically active.
kick net - a fine mesh net used to collect organisms. Kick nets vary in size, but generally
are about three feet long and are attached to two wooden poles at each end.
land uses - activities that take place on the land, such as construction, farming, or tree
clearing.
macroinvertebrate - organisms that lack a backbone and can be seen with the naked eye.
NPDES- National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System, a national program in which
pollution dischargers such as factories and sewage treatment plants are given permits to
discharge. These permits contain limits on the pollutants they are allowed to discharge.
orthophosphate - inorganic phosphorus dissolved in water.
outfall - the pipe through which industrial facilities and wastewater treatment plants
discharge their effluent (wastewater) into a waterbody.
permeable - porous.
pH - a numerical measure of the hydrogen ion concentration used to indicate the
alkalinity or acidity of a substance. Measured on a scale of 1.0 (acidic) to 14.0 (basic);
7.0 is neutral.
phosphorus - a nutrient that is essential for plants and animals.
photosynthesis - the chemical reaction in plants that utilizes light energy from the sun to
convert water and carbon dioxide into simple sugars. This reaction is facilitated by
chlorophyll.
pipet - an eyedropper-like instrument that can measure very small amounts of a liquid.
pool - deeper portion of a stream where water flows slower than in neighboring,
shallower portions.
precision - a measure of how close repeated trials are to each other.
protocol - defined procedure.
reagent - a substance or chemical used to indicate the presence of a chemical or to induce
a chemical reaction to determine the chemical characteristics of a solution.
riffle - shallow area in a stream where water flows swiftly over gravel and rock.
-------
riparian - of or pertaining to the banks of a body of water.
riparian zone - the vegetative area on each bank of a body of water.
riprap - rocks used on an embankment to protect against bank erosion.
run/glide - see glide/run.
saturated - inundated; filled to the point of capacity or beyond.
sheen - the glimmering effect that oil has on water as light is reflected more sharply off
the surface.
sieve bucket - a bucket with a screen bottom that is used to wash macroinvertebrate
samples and to remove excess silt and mud.
silviculture - forestry and the commercial farming of trees.
submergent plants - plants that live and grow fully submerged under the water.
substrate - refers to a surface. This includes the material comprising the stream bed or
the surfaces to which plants or animals may attach or live upon.
taxon (plural taxa) - a level of classification within a scientific system that categorizes
living organisms based on their physical characteristics.
taxonomic key - a quick reference guide used to identify organisms. They are available
in varying degrees of complexity and detail.
titration - the addition of small, precise quantities of a reagent to a sample until the
sample reaches a certain endpoint. Reaching the endpoint is usually indicated by a color
change.
tolerance - the ability to withstand a particular condition, e.g., pollution-tolerant
indicates the ability to live in polluted waters.
tributaries - a body of water that drains into another, typically larger, body of water.
turbidity - murkiness or cloudiness of water, indicating the presence of some suspended
sediments, dissolved solids, natural or manmade chemicals, algae, etc.
volumetric flask - a flask that holds a predetermined amount of liquid.
water quality criteria - maximum concentrations of pollutants that are acceptable, if
those waters are to meet water quality standards. Listed in state water quality standards.
water quality standards - written goals for state waters, established by each state and
approved by EPA.
watershed - the area of land drained by a particular river or stream system.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
-------
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
Pralecli&n
*"* •*
Office of Water
Water
Appendix B:
Scientific Supply Houses
This is a partial list of chemical and scientific equipment supply companies from which
to purchase equipment for a volunteer monitoring program.
Aquatic Research Instruments
P.O. Box 2214
Seattle, WA 98111
(206) 789-0138
Water samplers, plankton nets, Surber samplers, Hess samplers, drift nets, calibrated
lines, armored thermometers, BOD bottles.
Ben Meadows
3589 Broad Street
Atlanta, GA 30341
(800)241-6401
Waders, rubber boots, field water test equipment, kick nets, dip nets, wash buckets,
forceps.
Carolina Biological Supply Company
2700 York Court
Burlington, NC 272153398
(800)3345551
Flexible arm magnifiers, hand lenses, forceps, kick nets, microscopes, reagents,
educational materials, live and mounted specimens for instruction.
Cole Palmer Instruments, Inc.
625 East Bunker Court
Vernon Hills, IL 60061
(800)323-4340
Lab equipment, field water test equipment, microscopes.
Chemetrics
Route 28
Calverton, VA 22016-0214
(800) 356-3072
-------
Water testing mini-kits for field analysis of dissolved oxygen, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia,
phosphates, chlorine, sulfur, manganese, etc.
Consolidated Plastics
8181DarrowRoad
Twinsburg, OH 44087
(800) 362-1000
Sampling trays, buckets, nalgene bottles, garbage bags, Whirl Paks ®.
Dazor Manufacturing Corp.
4483 Duncan Ave.
St. Louis, MO 63110
(800) 245-9103
Illuminated magnifiers.
Fisher Scientific
711 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 152194785
(800)7667000
Lab equipment, sample bottles, sieves, reagents, incubators, water test equipment, Whirl
Paks ®.
Hach Equipment Company
P.O. Box 329
Loveland, CO 80539-0389
(800) 227-4224
Field and lab water testing equipment, spectrophotometers, incubators, water sampling
kits, fecal coliform sampling supplies, reagents, educational materials.
Hydrolab Corporation
P.O. Box 50116
Austin, TX 78763
(800) 949-3766
Water monitoring equipment and supplies.
LaMotte
P.O. Box 329
Chestertown, MD 21620
(800)3443100
Water sampling kits, field and lab water testing equipment, Secchi disks, water samplers,
armored thermometers, calibrated lines, plankton nets, kicknets, educational materials.
Lawrence Enterprises
P.O. Box 344
Seal Harbor, ME 04675
(207) 276-5746
Transparency tubes, view scopes, Secchi disks, water samplers, kick nets, sieve buckets.
-------
Millipore Corporation
397 Williams Street
Marlborough, MA 01752
(800) 645-5476
Fecal coliform testing supplies (complete sterile water filtration system), membrane
filters, sterile pipette, petri dishes, sterile media, other water sampling equipment and lab
supplies, incubators, Whirl Paks ®.
Nalge Company
P.O. Box 20365
Rochester, NY 14602
Fecal coliform testing supplies, disposal fecal coliform filtration systems, membrane
filters, sterile pipettes, petri dishes, incubators, Whirl Paks®.
Nichols Net and Twine, Inc.
200 Highway 111
Granite City, IL 62040
(618)797-0211
Kick nets.
Ohmicron
375 Pheasant Run
Newtown, PA 18940
(800)544-8881
Immunoassay kits for pesticides, other contaminants.
Thomas Scientific Company
99 High Hill Road at 1295
P.O. Box 99
Swedesboro, NJ 080850099
(609) 345-2100
Lab equipment, sample bottles, sieves, reagents, incubators, water test equipment, Whirl
Paks ®.
VWR Scientific
1230 Kennestone Circle
Marietta, GA 30066
(800) 932-5000
Glassware, labeling tape, sample vials, lab equipment, incubators, reagents, Whirl Paks
®.
Wards Biological and Lab Supplies
P.O. Box 92912
Rochester, NY 14692-9012
(800) 635-8439
Alcohol lamps, balances, microscopes, sample trays, goggles, rubber stoppers,
autoclaves, spectrophotometers, incubators, petri dishes, sterile pipettes, glassware,
-------
educational materials, live and mounted specimens for instruction.
Wildco Wildlife Supply Company
301 Cass Street
Saginaw, MI 48602
(517)7998100
Kick nets, wash buckets, field biological sampling equipment.
YSI Incorporated
1725 Brannum Lane
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387
(513)7677241
Water quality monitoring equipment supplies.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home Office of Water I Search Comments
-------
k Emir QnimwHal Protection Apncj1 M"« *
Office of Water
Monitoring Water Quality
Appendix C:
Determining Latitude and Longitude
There are many ways that monitoring groups identify and describe the location of sampling sites. Commonly, monitoring
sites are described by stream name and geographic location, such as Volunteer Creek at Oak Road or Volunteer Creek
behind the picnic area in Volunteer Park. Often these description are accompanied by an assigned station number (i.e.
VC001, VC002). Some programs use river miles—the distance from the sampling station to the stream's mouth—as an
additional identifier.
Maps, in many forms, are also typically used to help identify sites. These include road maps, state/county maps, aerial
maps, hand-drawn site maps, and topographic maps. Section 3.1 in Chapter 3, Water shed Survey Methods, discusses the
various types of maps used by monitoring programs and provides information on obtaining topographic maps from the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS).
The most accurate way to identify sampling locations is by determining their latitude and longitude. Any volunteer program
that wishes to have its data used by state, local, or federal agencies, or that plans to enter its data into a Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) either now or in the future, must provide latitudes and longitudes for its sampling locations.
EPA's STORET water quality database, for example, requires latitude/longitude information before any data can be entered.
Section 4.1 in Chapter 4,Macroinvertebrates and Habitat, briefly describes using a global positioning system (GPS) to
determine latitude and longitude. This hand-held tool is used in the field and receives signals from orbiting satellites to
calculate the lat/long coordinates of the user.
New tools are continuously developing to help you locate your sites. For example, EPA's Surf Your Watershed web page
ties in with the U.S. Geological Survey's Names Information System to provide latitude and longitude information for
locations throughout the U.S. These locations include bridges, schools, rivers, parks, and more. Visit this feature of Surf
Your Watershed at www.epa.gov/surf/surf_search.html for more information.
Latitude and longitude can also be calculated manually. To do this, you will need a topographic map, a metric ruler, and a
calculator. A worksheet for calculating latitude and longitude based on the EPA Region 10 Streamwalk protocol is
presented below.
Latitude and Longitude
Latitude and longitude are defined and measured in degrees (°), minutes ('), and seconds ("). There are 60 seconds in a
minute and 60 minutes in a degree of latitude and longitude.
Latitude (lat) is the angular distance of a particular location north or south from the equator. Latitude lines are called
parallels.
Longitude (long) is the angular distance of a particular location east or west of some prime meridian (usually Greenwich,
England). Longitude lines are called meridians.
-------
* /
Worksheet for Calculating Latitude and Longitude (PDF, 21.7 KB)
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF documents. The most recent version of the Adobe Acrobat Reader is available as a free
download. An Adobe Acrobat plug-in for assisted technologies is also available.
< Previous • Table of Contents • Next >
Office of Wetlands, Oceans & Watersheds Home
Watershed Protection Home Monitoring Water Quality Home
EPA Home | Office of Water | Search | Comments
-------
EPA/625/R-97/003
October 1997
ISO 14000 Resource Directory
Contract #68-3-0315
Work Assignment Manager
Emma Lou George
Technology Transfer and Support Division
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268-0001
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, Ohio
-------
DISCLAIMER
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of Research and Development
funded and managed the research described here under Contract #68-3-0315 to Eastern Research
Group, Inc. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has been
approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land,
air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency strives to
formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the
ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, EPA's research program
is providing data and technical support for solving environmental problems today and building a
science knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological resources wisely, understand how
pollutants affect our health, and prevent or reduce environmental risks in the future.
The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency's center for investigation of
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and the
environment. The focus of the Laboratory's research program is on methods for the prevention and
control of pollution to air, land, water and subsurface resources; protection of water quality in public
water systems; remediation of contaminated sites and ground water; and prevention and control of
indoor air pollution. The goal of this research effort is to catalyze development and implementation
of innovative, cost-effective environmental technologies; develop scientific and engineering
information needed by EPA to support regulatory and policy implementation of environmental
regulations and strategies.
This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory's strategic long-term research plan. It
is published and made available by EPA's Office of Research and Development to assist the user
community and to link researchers with their clients. This publication was developed jointly with the
USEPA Standards Network, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
This report, ISO 14000 Resource Directory, funded through the Center for Environmental Research
Information, is a pollution prevention guide for government and nonprofit initiatives and projects
related to the developing ISO 14000 series of Environmental Management Standards.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
in
-------
ABSTRACT
This Directory provides information about current initiatives related to the developing ISO 14000
series of environmental standards. Interest in the standards among governments, nongovernmental
organizations, industry and the public is high and expected to grow as the standards become
finalized. A measure of this interest is the fact that even before the first of the ISO 14000 series
standards was issued, over 100 government and nonprofit organizations submitted information for
inclusion in this Directory. This number excludes the hundreds of private sector initiatives, not
included in this Directory, that are also underway. The U.S. Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to
ISO Technical Committee 207 (the ISO Committee developing the ISO 14000 series standards),
for example, consists of hundreds of members from industry, government, consulting firms,
nongovernmental organizations, and academia. Dozens of private sector organizations have
emerged to offer training, consulting, and other services related to ISO 14000, while hundreds of
individual companies are investigating ISO 14000 to determine its implications.
The ISO 14000 is a global series of standards developed outside regulatory channels that has the
potential to revolutionize both the way industrial and other organizations manage environmental
affairs, the way regulatory agencies relate to the regulated community, and the way customers and
society at large relate to companies and other organizations. Whether this potential will be
realized is not yet clear. Much will depend on how industry, governments, and nongovernmental
organizations respond to, and use, the standards. If their potential is realized, the introduction of
the ISO 14000 series standards could be one of the most significant environmental developments
of our time.
This Directory is an effort by EPA to contribute to an understanding of the ISO 14000 series
standards. It does not attempt to promote or discourage use of the standards. Rather, it is
intended to facilitate communication among the many groups or individuals examining or using
the standards. A useful first step in improving our understanding of the standards is to provide a
forum where interested parties can communicate and learn from each others' experience.
The audience for this resource directory is anyone interested in the ISO 14000 series of
International Environmental Standards. Companies from large to small and government at all
levels could find the information contained in this directory useful.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract #68-3-0315 by Eastern Research Group, Inc.
under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report covers a period
from January, 1997 to May 31, 1997.
IV
-------
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1-1
2. U.S. EPA Initiatives
Agency-wide Initiatives 2-1
Headquarters Initiatives 2-3
Regional Initiatives and Support 2-9
3. Other Federal Initiatives
Department of Commerce 3-1
Department of Defense 3-2
Department of Energy 3-4
Department of State 3-6
Food and Drug Administration 3-7
Federal Trade Commission 3-7
U.S. Postal Service 3-8
4. State Initiatives
Alphabetical Listings by State 4-1
5. Nonprofit Initiatives
Industry Associations 5-1
Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) 5-3
Academic 5-7
6. International Initiatives
Multilateral Organizations 6-1
Alphabetical Listings by Country 6-3
7. Resources
U.S. National Standards 7-1
International Standards 7-1
Accreditation 7-1
Training 7-2
Clearinghouses 7-2
Publications 7-2
Internet Resources 7-2
v
-------
NOTICE
The purpose of this Directory is to provide information on government activities concerning ISO
14000 and/or Environmental Management Systems (EMS). It is therefore beyond the scope of
the Directory to include a comprehensive listing of all the private sector organizations and
initiatives also involved in ISO 14000 and/or EMS.
The ISO 14000 series of standards are copyrighted and can be obtained by contacting any of the
following organizations: ANSI, 7315 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 250-E Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel:
301-469-3363. ASTM, 100 Bar Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA 19428. Tel: 601-832-
9721. Fax: 601-832-9666. ASQC, 611 East Wisconsin Ave., P.O. Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI
53201. Tel: 800-248-1946. Fax: 414-272-1734. NSF International, 2100 Commonwealth
Blvd., Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Tel: 313-332-7333. Fax: 313-669-0196.
VI
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This Directory was prepared under the direction and coordination of Emma Lou George of the
U.S. EPA's Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research
Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio, with assistance from Mary McKiel of the EPA Standards
Network, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, in Washington, DC.
Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) of Lexington, Massachusetts, collected and compiled the
information contained in the Directory, and prepared and edited the material for publication.
Michael Cronin and Donald Fried-Tanzer, under the direction of Jeff Cantin, were the primary
ERG contributors to its development.
vn
-------
-------
INTRODUCTION
-------
-------
Overview
This Directory provides information about
current initiatives related to the developing ISO
14000 series of environmental standards. Interest
in the standards among governments,
nongovernmental organizations, industry and the
public is high and expected to grow as the
standards become finalized. A measure of this
interest is the fact that even before the first of the
ISO 14000 series standards was issued, over 100
government and nonprofit organizations
submitted information for inclusion in this
Directory. This number excludes the hundreds of
private sector initiatives, not included in this
Directory, that are also underway. The U.S.
Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to ISO
Technical Committee 207 (the ISO Committee
developing the ISO 14000 series standards), for
example, consists of hundreds of members from
industry, government, consulting firms,
nongovernmental organizations, and academia
(see Figure 2). Dozens of private sector
organizations have emerged to offer training,
consulting, and other services related to ISO
14000, while hundreds of individual companies
are investigating ISO 14000 to determine its
implications. At least two U.S. companies
certified to ISO 14001 while the standard was
still in draft form, and prior to the existence of
U.S. nationally accredited registrars.
The reasons for this interest in the ISO 14000
series standards are not hard to find. It is a
global series of standards developed outside
regulatory channels that has the potential to
revolutionize both the way industrial and other
organizations manage environmental affairs, the
way regulatory agencies relate to the regulated
community, and the way customers and society at
large relate to companies and other organizations.
Whether this potential will be realized is not yet
clear. Much will depend on how industry,
governments, and nongovernmental organizations
respond to, and use, the standards. If their
potential is realized, the introduction of the ISO
14000 series standards could be one of the most
significant environmental developments of our
time.
This Directory is an effort by EPA to contribute
to an understanding of the ISO 14000 series
standards. It does not attempt to promote or
discourage use of the standards. Rather, it is
intended to facilitate communication among the
many groups or individuals examining or using
the standards. A useful first step in improving
our understanding of the standards is to provide a
forum where interested parties can communicate
and learn from each others' experience.
What is ISO?
The International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) is a private sector,
international standards body based in Geneva,
Switzerland. The short form "ISO" is not an
acronym, but instead is derived from the Greek
isos, meaning "equal" (implying "standard").
Founded in 1947, ISO promotes the international
harmonization and development of
manufacturing, product and communications
standards. ISO has promulgated more than
8,000 internationally accepted standards covering
everything from paper sizes to film speeds. More
than 120 countries belong to ISO as full voting
members, while several other countries serve as
observer members. The United States is a full
voting member and is officially represented by
the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI), a nongovernmental, nonprofit standards
setting organization.
ISO produces internationally harmonized
standards through a structure of Technical
Committees (TCs). The TCs usually divide into
Subcommittees (SC), which are further
subdivided in Working Groups (WG) where the
actual standards writing occurs. For example,
ISO TC 207 is the ISO Committee developing
the ISO 14000 series of standards, SCI pertains
to Environmental Management Systems (EMS),
and SCI WG1 produced the ISO 14001 standard
(Figure 1 shows the structure of ISO TC 207).
1-1
-------
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
Geneva, Switzerland
Tel: 41-22-749-0111
Fax:41-22-733-3430
http://133.82.181.177/ikeda/ISO/home.html
Technical Committee (TC) 207: Environmental Management
Secretariat: Canada
Chair: Dr. Margeret Kerr
Secretary: James L. Dixon
Tel: 416-747-4103
Small and Medium
Sized Enterprises
Working Group
Subcommittee 2:
Environmental
Auditing and
Related
Environmental
Investigations
Secretariat:
the Netherlands
Netherlands
Normalistic Instituti
Subcommittee 3:
Environmental
Labeling
Secretariat:
Australia
Standards Austral!:
WG1-Auditing
Principles
WG2-Auditing
Procedures
WG^Audtor
Qualifications
WG4-Other
Investigations
Subcommittee 4:
Environmental
Performance
Evaluation
Secretariat:
United States
American National
Standards Institute
WG1 -Guiding
Principles for
Practitioner Programs
WG2-Self-Declaration
Claims
WG3-Guiding
Principles for
Environmental
Labeling Programs
Subcommittee 5:
Life-Cycle
Assessment
Secretariat:
France
Association
Francaise de
Normalisation
WG1-Generic
Environmental
Performance
Evaluation
WG2-lndustry Sector
Environmental
Performance
Evaluation
Subcommittee 6:
Terms and
Definitions
Secretariat:
Norway
Norges
Standardise ringsfor
bund
WG1-LCA General Principles and
Procedures
WG2-Life-Cycle Inventory Analysis
(General)
WG3-Life Cycle Inventory Analysis
(Specific)
WG4-Life-Cycle Impact Assessment
WG5-Life-Cycle Improvement
Assessment
Working Group 1:
Environmental Aspects in Product
Standards
Convener: Germany
Deutsche Institute fur Normung
Working Group on Forestry
Chairman:
Ken Shirley
New Zealand Forest
Owner's Association
Figure 1. Structure of ISO Technical Committee 207.
1-2
-------
Figure 2. U.S. Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to ISO TC-207
American National Standards Institute 212-642-4900
US TAG to ISO/TC 207
Chair: Joe Cascio 703 750 6401 Vice-Chair:
jcascio@gnet.org
Mary McKiel 202-260-3584
mckiel .mary@epamail .epa.gov
ST1 — Environmental Management Systems
Chair: Joel Charm 201-455-4057 EPA Rep:
joel .charm @alliedsignal .com
Jim Home 202-260-5802
horne.james@epamail.epa.govl
ST2 — Environmental Auditing
Chair: Cornelius (Bud) Smith EPA Rep:
203-778-6114
203-778-6487 Fax
Cheryl Wasserman 202-260-8797
wasserman.cheryl@epamail.epa.gov
ST3 — Environmental Labeling
Chair: Jim Connaughton 202-736-8364 EPA Rep:
jconnaugh@sidley.com
Julie Lynch 202-260-4000
lynch.julie@epamail.epa.gov
ST4 — Environmental Performance Evaluation
Chair: John Master 610-359-4810 EPA Rep:
610-359-4862 Fax
John Harman 202-260-6395
harman.j ohn@epamail .epa.gov
ST5 — Life Cycle Assessment
Chair: James Fava 610-701-3636 EPA Rep:
favaj @wcpost2 .rfweston.com
Mary Ann Curran 513-569-7837
curran .maryann@epamail .epa.gov
ST6 — Terms and Definitions
Chair: Christopher Bell 202-736-8 1 18 EPA Rep:
cbell@sidley.com
Mary McKiel 202-260-3584
mckiel .mary@epamail .epa.gov
SWG — Environmental Aspects in Product Standards
Chair: Stanley Rhodes 510-832-1415 EPA Rep:
John Shoaff 202-260- 1831
shoaff.j ohn@epamail .epa.gov
For information on joining the U.S. TAG, contact ASTM at 610-832-9721.
1-3
-------
What are the ISO 14000
Series Standards?
The ISO 14000 standards are a series of
voluntary standards developed under the ISO
framework to address organizational
environmental management. Like the ISO 9000
series quality standards on which they are largely
modeled, the ISO 14000 series standards focus
on management systems rather than on
performance levels. Just as it is impossible to
define "quality" across a wide range of products,
it is difficult to define environmental performance
across a wide range of activities, products, and
services, as well as across differing national
regulatory systems. The ISO 14000 series
standards do not address the issue of
performance. Instead, they identify management
system elements that are intended to lead to
improved performance: a method to identify
significant environmental aspects; a policy that
includes a commitment to regulatory compliance,
the prevention of pollution and continual
improvement; environmental objectives and
targets for all relevant levels and functions in the
organization; procedures to ensure performance,
as well as compliance procedures to monitor and
measure performance; and a systematic
management review process. One of the issues
regulatory agencies and stakeholders must
consider is how these systems' conformance
requirements will interact with regulatory
performance requirements.
The ISO 14000 series of standards include
"specification" standard, ISO 14001. The rest
are guidance standards which provide optional
guidance for companies developing and
implementing management systems and product
standards. The ISO 14001 specification standard
"contains only those requirements that may be
objectively audited for certification/registration
purposes and/or self declaration purposes." The
various standards are at different stages of
development from published final International
Standards (IS) to New Work Item (NWI)
Proposals (see Figure 3).
ISO 14001, 14004, 14010, 14011/1 and 14012
are published final International Standards. For
the developing status of the other documents it is
best to consult one of the many newsletters or
Internet websites which track this information
(please see Chapter 7, Resources).
The ISO 14000 series of standards are
copyrighted and can be obtained by contacting
any of the following organizations: ANSI, 7315
Wisconsin Ave., Suite 250-E, Bethesda, MD
20814, Tel: 301-469-3363. ASTM, 100 Bar
Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA, 19428,
Tel: 610-832-9721, Fax: 610-832-9666. ASQC,
611 East Wisconsin Ave., P.O. Box 3005,
Milwaukee, WI 53201, Tel: 800-248-1946, Fax:
414-272-1734. NSF International, 2100
Commonwealth Blvd., Ann Arbor, MI 48105,
Tel: 313-332-7333, Fax: 313-669-0196.
Initiatives Described in this
Resource Directory
Application and acceptance of the ISO 14000
standards are still evolving, therefore very few
initiatives described in this Resource Directory
are tightly tied to the ISO standards themselves.
Organizations are not waiting, however, for all
the various standards to be finalized. Instead,
they are initiating a wide range of projects
revolving around the major themes addressed in
the ISO 14000 series standards: environmental
management systems, product and process life
cycles, extended producer responsibility, moving
beyond compliance, environmental performance
evaluation, third party certification, etc. For the
purposes of this Resource Directory the
definition of an "ISO 14000 Initiative" includes
both projects related formally to the ISO 14000
series standards and those more loosely related to
some of the major themes of the standards. With
this scope identified, a wide variety of
organizations were invited to submit information
about initiatives that would be of interest to
others tracking ISO 14000. The purpose of this
Directory is to provide information on
government activities concerning ISO 14000
and/or Environmental Management Systems
(EMS). It is therefore beyond the scope of the
1-4
-------
Directory to include a comprehensive listing of
all the private sector organizations and initiatives
also involved in ISO 14000 and/or EMS. Each
entry includes a description of the initiative
and provides the name, address and telephone
number of a contact person who is prepared to
discuss the results of their exploration with
others examining or using the standards. Where
possible, e-mail addresses and Universal
Resource Locators, or URLs addresses (World
Wide Web), have also been provided to facilitate
electronic communication. This Resource
Directory will also be available for download in
* .pdf format online at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttbnrmrl/ceri.htm and in the
near future will be interactive to allow users to
access these resources directly through the
Internet.
EPA's Involvement with ISO
14000
ISO 14000 is a voluntary, private sector
initiative that EPA views has the potential to
achieve environmental benefits. EPA has been
involved in the development of the standards
since their inception. EPA's Mary McKiel is the
Vice Chairman of the U.S. Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) to ISO Technical Committee 207.
Moreover, EPA is represented on the Chairman's
Advisory Group and on the U.S. National
Accreditation Program for environmental
management systems standards (ISO 14001).
The chief mechanism for organizing EPA's
involvement with ISO 14000 is the Voluntary
Standards Network.
The Voluntary Standards Network was
established by Administrator Carol Browner in
1993 to address international voluntary standards
activities. A primary focus of the Network has
been to coordinate the Agency's participation in
the development of the ISO 14000 standards for
environmental management. This coordination
helps ensure that the Agency speaks with one
voice on important issues and activities as they
pertain to voluntary standards, such as the ISO
14000 series.
Key EPA activities to date have included:
— Providing an information clearinghouse.
EPA activities such as this Directory are
intended to inform the regulatory community,
stakeholder groups, and other interested
parties (including industry) of key activities
taking place both within the ISO setting, and
among government agencies and nonprofit
organizations.
— Evaluating the potential usefulness of ISO
14000 in a regulatory setting. A number of
projects are underway to evaluate whether
and how the ISO 14000 series standards
interact with regulatory requirements.
Numerous legal and practical issues remain
to be resolved in evaluating ISO 14000 as a
complement to regulatory programs. These
issues are being addressed in pilot projects
that will provide useful lessons for future
programs.
— Assisting small and mid-sized companies.
A key issue facing small and mid-sized
companies will be how to adapt to the
requirements of ISO 14000 with fewer
resources than those available to the large
multinational companies that participated
heavily in the development of standards.
— Organizing conferences. EPA
Headquarters held a one-day conference on
ISO 14000 in February, 1997 in
Washington, DC. The conference provided
an overview of the ISO 14000 standards, and
included presentations from EPA offices
involved in standards development and pilot
projects.
Other Initiatives Related to
ISO 14000
— As illustrated in this Resource Directory,
other government agencies, state
governments, and nonprofit organizations are
1-5
-------
involved in a number of significant initiatives
related to ISO 14000. Included are:
— Work groups and study groups established
by federal agencies, states, and multilateral
organizations to evaluate the potential role of
ISO 14000 in regulatory and nonregulatory
programs.
— Initiatives by various departments of the
federal government and the U.S. Postal
Service to use ISO 14000 in facilities
management.
— Inclusion of ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 by the
Food and Drug Administration in
environmental management system
registration.
— Development of tools for ISO 14000 by the
National Institute of Science and Technology
(NIST) Manufacturing Extension Programs
(MEP) which provide technical assistance to
small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).
— Programs in over 28 states to include, or to
consider ISO 14001, as part of innovative
environmental management programs.
— Industry and trade association programs to
acquaint their members with ISO 14000.
How To Use This Resource
Directory
This Resource Directory is intended principally
as a forum for users and interested parties to
learn about ISO 14000, to find out who is
involved in ISO 14000-related initiatives, and to
communicate with one another. The Directory
contains information primarily on initiatives
being developed by government and nonprofit
organizations. Other organizations are
developing useful directories of resources and
initiatives in the for-profit sector (see Chapter 7,
Resources). It is important to recognize,
therefore, that in addition to the resources listed
in this Directory, there exist numerous other
directories, newsletters, and other publications
related to ISO 14000, as well as a wide range of
private organizations that organize conferences,
provide training programs, and assist with
implementation of ISO 14000.
EPA hopes that the audience for this Resource
Directory will be able to use it in a number of
ways:
— Review the Directory from beginning to end
to get an idea of the breadth and scope of
initiatives currently underway.
— Reference the sections that include
organizations you work with to see what
initiatives are underway and learn how they
may affect you.
— Find out about initiatives underway in your
local area by referencing the state-by-state or
regional EPA listings.
— Look up organizations similar to yours to
find out what they are doing and learn from
their progress to date.
Reference the online version of this directory at
EPA's Technology Transfer webpage:
http://www.epa.gov/ttbnrmrl/ceri.htm (to be in
place in early 1998) and use the search engine to
find entries by keyword.
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Used in this Resource
Directory
EMS
E-mail
ISO
P2
Environmental Management
Systems
Electronic Mail
International Organization for
Standardization
Pollution Prevention
1-6
-------
SME
URL
Small to Medium Sized
Enterprises
Universal Resource Locator
Figure 3. Standards in the ISO 14000 Series— Status as of June 1997
Organizational Evaluation
ISO 14001
ISO 14004
ISO 14010
ISO 14011/1
ISO 14012
ISO 14015
ISO 14031
Environmental Management Systems — Specifications with
Guidance for Use
Environmental Management Systems — General Guidelines on
Principles, Systems, and Supporting Techniques
Guidelines for Environmental Auditing — General Principles on
Environmental Auditing
Guidelines for Environmental Auditing — Audit Procedures — Audit
of Environmental Management Systems
Guidelines for Environmental Auditing — Qualification Criteria for
Environmental Auditors
Environmental Site Assessments
Evaluation of Environmental Performance
Final International Standard
Final International Standard
Final International Standard
Final International Standard
Final International Standard
First Working Draft
Committee Draft
Product Evaluation
ISO 14040
ISO 14041
ISO 14042
ISO 14043
ISO 14020
ISO 14021
ISO 14022
ISO 14023
ISO 14024
ISO 14025
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Analysis — Principles and
Framework
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Analysis — Life Cycle
Inventory Analysis
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Analysis — Impact
Assessment
Environmental Management — Life Cycle Analysis — Interpretation
Goals and Principles of All Environmental Labeling
Environmental Labels and Declarations — Self Declaration
Environmental Claims — Terms and Definitions
Environmental Labels and Declarations — Self Declaration
Environmental Claims — Symbols
Environmental Labels and Declarations — Self Declaration
Environmental Claims — Testing and Verification
Environmental Labels and Declarations — Environmental Labeling
Type I — Guiding Principles and Procedures
Environmental Labels and Declarations — Environmental
Information Profiles — Type III Guiding Principles and Procedures
Under vote as Final International
Standard
Committee Draft for ballot
Working Draft
Working Draft
Committee Draft for Comment
Draft International Standard
Under vote as Committee Draft
as above
Committee Draft
New Work Item
1-7
-------
ISO Guide
64
Figure 3. Standards in the ISO 14000 Series—Status as of June 1997
Guide for Inclusion of Environmental Aspects in Product Standards ISO Guide
Overall
ISO 14050 Terms and Definitions—Guide on the Principles for ISO/TC
207/SC6 Terminology Work
Draft International Standard
ISO Standards Development Process:
(1) New Work Item proposal, (2) New Work Item assigned to Subcommittee, (3) Working Draft, (4) Committee Draft, (5)
Draft International Standard (or optional Final Draft International Standard), (6) International Standard.
1-8
-------
How To Update This
Resource Directory
Like the ISO 14000 standard development
process, this Resource Directory is a work in
progress. Over the coming months and years, it
will evolve dramatically as new initiatives are
added and other initiatives are completed or
discontinued. This Resource Directory will only
function well if it is maintained in an up-to-date
manner. For that the Agency must rely on the
user community. We therefore ask you, the users
of the Resource Directory, to help us keep it up
to date by informing us of:
— New entries to add to the Directory.
— Corrections to entries listed in the Directory.
— Updates and changes in your activities.
— New initiatives undertaken by your
organization.
— Leads on new or existing initiatives that have
not been included in this Resource Directory.
Please use the form on the inside back cover of
the Resource Directory to submit updates,
corrections, and information on new initiatives.
1-9
-------
-------
U.S. EPA
INITIATIVES
Numerous offices within the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
are examining the ISO 14000 series of standards and considering its effects upon
their program sand activities. The first part of this chapter lists initiatives
undertaken by EPA headquarters offices, sorted alphabetically by the lead EPA
office. The second part lists regional EPA initiatives, presented in numerical order
by EPA region.
1. Agency-wide Initiatives
2. Headquarters Initiatives
3. Regional Initiatives and Support
-------
-------
AGENCY-WIDE
INITIATIVES
The Voluntary Standards
Network
The Voluntary Standards Network was
established by EPA Administrator Browner in
1993 to address international voluntary standards
activities. A primary focus of the Network has
been to coordinate the Agency's participation in
the development of the ISO 14000 standards for
environmental management. With the passage of
the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act in 1996, the Network also acts
a principal means by which the EPA Standards
Executive communicates policies and procedures
regarding national and international voluntary
consensus standards to the designated Agency
Standards Coordinators. The Standards
Coordinators are key points of contact for the
Network. The Network mechanism assists the
Agency in developing positions on the
development and implementation of standards,
including the ISO 14000 standards, and
identifying their applicability to EPA projects
and initiatives. The Network also provides
standards-related information and training to
EPA offices nationwide and works closely with
the EPA Trade and Environment Task Force on
issues involving international trade agreements
such as the World Trade Organization.
Coordination through the Network helps ensure
that EPA speaks with one voice on important
activities as they pertain to standards, such as the
ISO 14000 series. To date, there are over 160
members of the Network from across the Agency.
While the Network is administered by the Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, other Agency
Offices and Regions are actively involved and
take lead roles in the Network activities.
Addr: Mary McKiel, Director
Voluntary Standards Network
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(7409)
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3584
Fax: 202-260-0178
E-mail: mckiel.mary@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: Eric Wilkinson, Coordinator
Voluntary Standards Network
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(7409)
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3575
Fax: 202-260-0178
E-mail: wilkinson.eric@epamail.epa.gov
Voluntary Standards
Executive
Addr: Pep Fuller, EPA Standards Executive
Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances, 7101
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-2897
Standards Coordinators
Addr: Jim Home, Standards Coordinator
Environmental Management System
(EMS) sub-TAG lead
EPA EMS Workgroup chair
Office of Water, 4201
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5802
Addr: Ken Feith, Standards Coordinator
Office of Air and Radiation, 6103
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-4996
Addr: Greg Mertz, Standards Coordinator
Office of International Activities, 2621
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5714
Addr: Jerry Newsome, Standards Coordinator
Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation, 2128
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-8666
2-1
-------
Addr: Elaine Koerner, Standards Coordinator
Office of Communication, Education and
Public Affairs, 1702
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-2623
Addr: Brian Riedel, Standards Coordinator
and
Chair of ISO 1400 I/EMS Task Group
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance, 2201A
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5006
Addr: Dana Arnold, Standards Coordinator
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, 5306W
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 703-308-7279
Addr: David Scott Smith, Standards
Coordinator
Office of Administration and Resource
Management, 3207
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-1647
Addr: Emma Lou George
Office of Research and Development,
G77
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268-0001
Tel: 513-569-7578
Agency Sub-TAG leads to the
US TAG
Addr: Cheryl Wasserman, Auditing
Sub-TAG lead
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance, 2251A
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-7219
Addr: Julie Lynch, Labeling Sub-TAG lead
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, 7409
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-4000
Addr: John Harman, Environmental
Performance Evaluation
Sub-TAG lead
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, 7408
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-6395
Addr: Susan McLaughlin, Environmental
Performance Evaluation sub-TAG
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, 7409
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3844
Addr:
466
Mary Ann Curran, Life Cycle Analysis
sub-TAG lead
Office of Research and Development,
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Tel: 513-569-7782
Addr: John Shoaff, Standards Coordinator and
Environmental Aspects in Product
Standards & Terms & Definitions
sub-TAG lead
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, 7409
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-1831
Regional Coordinators
Addr: David Guest, Standards Coordinator
Region 1
One Congress Street
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
2-2
-------
Boston, MA 02203-0001
Tel: 617-223-5541
Addr: Jehuda Menczel, Standards Coordinator
Region 2
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
Tel: 212-637-4045
Addr: Linda Mauel, Alternate Coordinator
Region 2
2890 Woodbridge Ave., MS-220
Edison, NJ 08837-3679
Tel: 908-321-6766
Addr: Jeff Burke, Standards Coordinator
Region 3
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Tel: 215-566-2761
Addr: David Abbott, Standards Coordinator
Region 4
100 Alabama Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Tel: 404-347-2643
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
Tel: 303-312-6146
Addr: Bonnie Barkett, Standards Coordinator
Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: 415-744-1908
Addr: Nancy Helm, Standards Coordinator
Region 10
1200 Sixth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
Tel: 206-553-8659
Addr: David Tetta, Standards Coordinator
Region 10
1200 Sixth Ave.
Seattle, WA 98101
Tel: 206-553-1327
HEADQUARTERS
INITIATIVES
Addr: Catherine Allen, Standards Coordinator
Region 5
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60640-3507
Tel: 312-886-0180
Addr: Bob Clark, Standards Coordinator
Region 6
Fountain Place, 12th Floor, Suite 1200
1445 Ross Ave.
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Tel: 214-665-6487
Addr: Chilton McLaughlin, Standards
Coordinator
Region 7
726 Minnesota Ave.
Kansas City, KS 66101
Tel: 913-551-7666
Addr: David Schaller, Standards Coordinator
Region 8
Office of Air Quality Planning
& Standards (OAQPS)
OAQPS Web site. The OAQPS Web site is the
clearinghouse for EPA regulations regarding air
quality.
Addr: Tom Link, OAQPS Webmaster
U.S. EPA (MD-12)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Tel: 919-541-5456
Fax: 919-541-0242
E-mail: link.tom@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oa
Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR)
Natural Gas STAR Program. This voluntary
program is designed to cost-effectively reduce
emissions of greenhouse gases from the natural
gas industry. Developed as a partnership
2-3
-------
between the EPA and the natural gas industry,
the program addresses emissions of methane and
carbon dioxide through a series of cost-effective
best management practices.
Addr: Rhone Resch, Program Manager
U.S. EPA (6202J)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-233-9793
Fax: 202-233-9569
E-mail: resch.rhone@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.ctc.com
OAR Web site. The OAR Web site is the
clearinghouse for information on EPA's efforts to
protect and preserve air quality.
Addr: Tom Link, OAR Superstructure
Manager
U.S. EPA (MD-12)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Tel: 919-541-5456
Fax: 919-541-0242
E-mail: link.tom@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/oar
Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance
(OECA)
Environmental Leadership Program (ELP).
ELP is one of the 25 Reinventing Environmental
Regulations announced on March 16, 1995, by
President Clinton. A 1-year pilot phase was
completed in August 1996 that evaluated
opportunities for new tools using third party
auditing and alternative performance-based
management systems. The success of the 12
pilot projects demonstrated the effectiveness of
partnerships with state environmental agencies,
and the cooperative ability in conducting a
voluntary program with industry and federal
facilities.
The goals for the implementation of the full-scale
ELP by January 1997 include 1) better
environmental and human health protection by
promoting a systematic approach to managing
environmental issues and by encouraging
environmental enhancement activities; 2)
increased identification and timely resolution of
environmental compliance issues by ELP
participants; 3) multiplying the compliance
assistance efforts by including industry as
mentors; and 4) fostering constructive and open
relationships between agencies, the regulated
community, and the public.
The foundation for recognizing environmental
leaders will be the implementation of an
environmental management system (EMS), an
integrated, structured, and systematic approach
for identifying significant environmental impacts
resulting from an organization's activities,
products, and services. The intent is to achieve
compliance with environmental regulations,
provide an ability for continuous improvement,
identify opportunities for implementing pollution
prevention activities and practices, and
communicate effectively with outside
stakeholders on the organization's EMS and its
performance.
The 6-year ELP participation period is designed
to publicly recognize specific facilities or entities,
as well as offer benefits for participation through
reduced inspections, a self-correction period for
violations, and streamlined administrative
requirements. EPA anticipates that the ELP will
be coordinated in partnership with interested state
environmental agencies, in order to extend the
benefits offered on a state-by-state basis.
Facilities/entities will be required to conduct
compliance and EMS auditing in conjunction
with third party verification of the audits. EPA
will also make an annual environmental report
available to the public. This proposed
framework is currently available to all
stakeholders for review and comment.
Addr: Tai-ming Chang, Director, ELP
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Office of Compliance (2223-A)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-5081
Fax: 202-564-0050
E-mail: chang.
taiming@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://es.inel.gov/elp
2-4
-------
Addr: Debby Thomas, Deputy Director, ELP
See above
Tel: 202-564-5041
Fax: 202-564-0050
E-mail:
thomas .deborah@epamail. epa.gov
URL: http://es.inel.gov/elp
ISO 14001/EMS Task Group. This task group
is composed of representatives from all major
EPA offices and 8 Regions, the Department of
Justice, and 18 states (Alaska, Arizona,
California, Colorado, Delaware, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska,
New Jersey, New York, North Carolina,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Washington, and Wisconsin).
The primary purpose of the task group is to
determine and make recommendations regarding
the relationship between ISO 14001, EMS
standards, compliance, enforcement, and
improved environmental performance. By fall
1997, EPA expects to solicit public comment on
metrics or indicators for evaluating
environmental performance in EMS pilots.
Addr: Brian Riedel, Counsel
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Office of Planning and Policy Analysis
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-5006
Fax: 202-501-0701
E-mail: riedel .brian@epamail. epa.gov
Office of Federal Activities
EMS Audit Procedural Guidelines. A sub-task
group of the U.S. Technical Advisory Group
(U.S. TAG) for ISO's EMS development
produced the EMS audit procedural guidelines. A
final draft currently out for comment will be used
in conjunction with ISO Standard Guidelines in
Environmental Auditing Principles, procedures
and qualifications set forth in ISO14010-12
related to environmental auditing. These
guidelines will assist auditors conducting ISO
14001 conformance audits and set boundaries for
EMS audits used for internal self-assessments,
self- certifications of conformity with ISO
14001, or by registrars for ISO 14001
registrations to ensure they are at once credible,
replicable, and not overly burdensome or
interpretive of the ISO standards. This document
will be revised as needed upon further review
within the United States and among key
stakeholder groups.
Addr: Cheryl Wasserman, Associate Director
for Policy Analysis
Office of Federal Activities, OECA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(2251-A)
401M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-7129
Fax: 202-564-0070
E-mail:
wasserman.cheryl@epamail.epa.gov
Office of Policy, Planning, and
Evaluation (OPPE)
Indiana Small Business Pilot Project. Please
see Chapter 4, under Indiana, for full listing.
Addr: Carl Koch
U.S. EPA, Office of Policy, Planning
and Evaluation
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-2739
Fax: 202-260-9322
E-mail: koch.carl@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/oppe/isd/isd.htm
Office of Prevention,
Pesticides and Toxics
Consumer Labeling Initiative. The Consumer
Labeling Initiative's goal is to foster pollution
prevention, empower consumer choice, and
improve understanding by presenting clear,
consistent, and useful safe use, environmental,
and health information on household consumer
product labels. This is a multi-phased voluntary
pilot project focusing on indoor insecticides,
outdoor pesticides, and household hard surface
cleaners.
Addr: Julie Lynch
2-5
-------
Pollution Prevention Division
(MC-7409)
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-4000
Fax: 202-260-0178
E-mail: lynch.julie@epamail.epa.gov
Environmental Accounting Project. The
Environmental Accounting Project is a
nonregulatory partnership program with a
mission of helping organizations highlight the
economic benefits of practicing pollution
prevention. Its objective is to encourage and
motivate businesses to understand the full
spectrum of their environmental costs, and
integrate these costs into strategic decision-
making.
Addr: Susan McLaughlin
Pollution Prevention Division (MC-
7409)
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3844
Fax: 202-260-0178
E-mail: mclaughlin.susan@epamail.epa.
gov
URL: http://es.inel.gov/partners/
acctg/acctg.html
Environmentally-Preferable Public
Purchasing. The Environmentally Preferable
Purchasing Program implements Executive Order
12873 which requires EPA to "issue guidance
that recommends principals that Executive
agencies should use in making determinations for
the preference and purchase of environmentally
preferable products" and services. The
Program's goal is make environmental
performance a factor in Federal government
purchasing decisions, along with traditional
factors, such as product performance and cost.
Addr: Eun-Sook Goidel
Pollution Prevention Division
(MC-7409)
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M St. SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3296
Fax: 202-260-0178
E-mail:
goidel.eun-sook@epamail.epa.gov
Expanding the Use of Environmental
Information by the Banking Industry Through
ISO 14000. This effort will initially be an EPA-
funded study to explore the potential utility of
ISO 14000-generated information for banks in
their risk management practices.
Addr:
Tel:
Fax:
Addr:
Ed Weiler
Pollution Prevention Division
U.S. EPA (7409)
401M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
202-260-2996
202-260-0178
Brian Murray
Center for Economics Research
Research Triangle Institute
3040 Cornwallis Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Tel: 919-541-6468
Fax: 919-541-6683
E-mail: bcm@rti.org
Office of Research and
Development (ORD)
Environmental Technology Verification
Program. EPA has evaluated technology to
determine their effectiveness in preventing,
controlling, and cleaning up pollution. As a part
of the Environmental Technology Initiative, EPA
is now expanding these efforts by instituting a
new program, the Environmental Technology
Verification Program (ETV), to verify the
performance of a larger universe of innovative
technical solutions to problems that threaten
human health or the environment. ETV was
2-6
-------
created to substantially accelerate the entrance of
new environmental technologies into the domestic
and international marketplace. It supplies
technology buyers and developers, consulting
engineers, states, and EPA regions with data on
the performance of new technologies to
encourage more rapid protection of the
environment with better and less expensive
approaches. EPA will utilize the expertise of
both public and private partner "verification
organizations," including federal laboratories,
states, universities, and private sector facilities,
to design efficient processes for conducting or
overseeing performance tests of innovative
technologies.
Verification organizations will oversee and report
verification activities based on testing and quality
assurance protocols developed with input from
all major stakeholder and customer groups
associated with the technology area.
Addr: Penelope Hansen
U.S. EPA, ORD (8301)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-2600
Fax: 202-260-3861
E-mail:
hansen.penelope@epamail .epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/etv
Implementing EMS in the Metal Finishing
Industry. In this EPA-funded project, 11
organizations from the metal finishing industry
are piloting the implementation of the ISO 14001
Standard. The project will result in a publicly
available report, in addition to an EMS guidance
document for metal finishers. The metal
finishing report and guidance document will be
completed by December 1997.
Addr: Greg Ondich
U.S. EPA, ORD
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5753
E-mail: ondich.greg@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/etv
Addr: Craig Diamond
NSF International
2100 Commonwealth Blvd., Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Tel: 313-332-7341
Fax: 313-669-0196
Office of Water (OW)
EMS Demonstration Project. This EPA project
has provided seed money for 18 public and
private organizations to put an EMS in place
using ISO 14001 as a model. The program has
provided initial training and follow-up consulting
through NSF International. This initiative will
generate a series of reports on the various pilot
projects, which will be available through the OW
resource center in both hard copy and on the
Internet.
Addr: Jim Home
U.S. EPA, OW (4201)
401M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5802
Fax: 202-260-1040
E-mail: horne.james@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: Craig Diamond
NSF International
2100 Commonwealth Blvd., Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Tel: 313-332-7341
Fax: 313-669-0196
EMS Implementation Guide for Small- and
Medium-Sized Organizations. EPA's Office of
Water and Office of Compliance, in conjunction
with NSF International, has developed an
implementation guide geared specifically to the
needs of small- and medium- sized organizations.
The elements of the document are based on the
ISO 14001 Standard. The guide is formatted and
written in such a way as to give these types of
organizations useful ideas on how to begin
implementing EMS and ways to find additional
helpful information.
2-7
-------
Using EMS To Meet Watershed Protection
Goals. This project seeks to contribute to the
attainment of watershed goals through a system-
based voluntary approach. Participants are linked
to achievement of watershed goals in the Arbor-
Middle Kron River Watershed. A joint project of
OW and the county government in Washtenaw
County (Michigan), the initiative involves
recruiting organizations to participate in training
and improving technical systems relevant to the
organization.
Addr: Jim Home
U.S. EPA, OW (4201)
401M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5802
Fax: 202-260-1040
E-mail: horne.james@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: Anita M. Cooney
NSF International
2100 Commonwealth Blvd., Suite 100
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Tel: 313-332-7333
Fax: 313-669-0196
EMS Implementation by Municipal
Governments. OW hopes to work with selected
municipal or county government organizations
that are willing to implement EMS for their
various activities, using ISO 14001 as a baseline.
Preliminary discussions with interested parties
have begun and an overall project implementation
plan is expected in Fall 1997. This effort will
demonstrate the relevance of EMS for public-
sector organizations.
OW EMS Implementation Workgroup. OW, in
conjunction with regional offices and states, is
forming a workgroup to explore possible ways to
encourage implementation of EMS by facilities
regulated under various parts of the water
program. The workgroup will concentrate on
issues relating to regulatory programs in areas
such as permitting, and explore the possible use
of incentives for facilities with good compliance
records that can also implement effective EMS.
ISO 14001 will serve as the baseline for this
effort, but the workgroup will also examine other
possible criteria that facilities may need to satisfy
as a condition for any type of regulatory or other
flexibility.
Addr: Jim Home
U.S. EPA, OW (4201)
401M Street SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-5802
Fax: 202-260-1040
E-mail: horne.james@epamail.epa.gov
Office of Federal Facilities
Enforcement
Code of Environmental Management
Principles for Federal Agencies (CEMP).
CEMP, an element of the Federal Government
Environmental Challenge Program established in
response to Section 4-405 of Executive Order
12856, is a set of five principles encouraging
federal agencies to be more aware and visionary
in their management of environmental protection
issues. The principles incorporate many common
elements of EMS, and ISO 14001 and several
other public and private sector documents were
used as background. A Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory (PNNL) team supported
EPA's Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement in
developing the CEMP. EPA has asked federal
agencies to endorse the principles and provide a
description of how they will be implemented at
the facility level.
Addr: Jim Edwards, Deputy Director
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Planning, Prevention &
Compliance (2261-A)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-2462
Fax: 202-501-0069
E-mail:
edwards.j ames@epamail .epa.gov
EMS Primer for Federal Facilities. EPA's
Federal Facility Enforcement and DOE's Office
of Environmental Policy and Assistance are
2-8
-------
jointly sponsoring the development of an
Environmental Management Systems Primer for
Federal Facilities with EPA's Office of Federal
Facilities Enforcement. A PNNL team is
supporting development. Topics covered will
include an introduction to EMS and federal
facility issues; the first steps in building an EMS;
regulatory issues; innovative regulatory
approaches; performance indicators; pollution
prevention; audits and conformity assessment
options; and the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA). The primer is designed to be
concise, include extensive references, and provide
useful examples and concrete steps.
Addr: Andrew Cherry
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
(2261-A)
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-564-5011
Fax: 202-501-0644
E-mail: cherry.andrew@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: Larry Stirling
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-586-0955
E-mail: john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
(This entry is cross-listed under DOE initiatives
in Chapters.)
National Enforcement
Investigations Center
Compliance-Focused EMS. Since the late
1980s, civil multimedia compliance
investigations conducted by the NEIC have
increasingly involved identifying causes of
observed noncompliance. When investigated,
noncompliance most often appeared to be caused
by dysfunctional EMS. Through this work and
by participating in followup enforcement actions,
NEIC developed criteria for a compliance-
focused EMS that has been used as the basis for
several of the settlement agreements when EMS
improvements were required. The agreements
required the organization to document policies,
systems, procedures, and standards for 11
program elements, with the resulting document
serving as a guidebook to more detailed
procedures and processes located elsewhere at a
facility.
The intended result is to develop an EMS that
will both improve the organization's compliance
with applicable environmental requirements and
lead to improved environmental performance.
The elements were synthesized primarily from
EMS assessment protocols developed for the
Global Environmental Management Initiative
(1992) and a regulated industry (1994) by
Deloitte and Touche LLP of San Francisco; ISO
14001; National Sanitation Foundation EMS
standards (NSF 110-1995); and the due diligence
definition in the EPA policy regarding Incentives
for Self-Policing (60 FR 66710). Element
refinement continues through settlement
negotiations and discussions with EPA staff,
EMS consultants, and environmental personnel
from several companies with medium and large
facilities.
Addr: Steve Sisk
U.S. EPA-NEIC
Box 25227, Bldg 53
Denver Federal Center
Denver, CO 80225
Tel: 303-236-3636 ext. 540
Fax: 303-236-2395
E-mail: sisk.steve@epamail.epa.gov
Project XL
XL projects are real world tests of innovative
strategies that achieve cleaner and cheaper results
than conventional regulatory approaches. EPA
will grant regulated entities regulatory flexibility
in exchange for their commitment to achieve
better environmental results than would have
been attained through full regulatory compliance.
2-9
-------
Addr: Jon Kessler
401 M Street, SW (MC 2129)
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-3761
Fax: 202-401-6637
E-mail: kessler.jon@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/ProjectXL
EPA REGIONAL
INITIATIVES AND
SUPPORT
Region 1
StarTrack. EPA's regional office in Boston is
conducting a groundbreaking experiment to
privatize compliance assurance for leading
companies. Built on the ISO 14000 model, the
region will be empowering third parties to certify
to three basic components: 1) an environmental
management system modeled on ISO 14001; 2)
facility environmental compliance and pollution
prevention audits; and 3) a commitment to
correct certain violations within an established
time frame. The third party will certify to each
component and provide a summary report. In
return, EPA will grant certified companies
limited penalty amnesty, no routine inspections,
simplified reporting and expedited permitting.
EPA plans to refocus resources previously
devoted to these sources to issues that pose a
greater risk to the environment.
Addr: Dave Guest, StarTrack Coordinator
U.S. EPA, Region 1 (SPE)
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA. 02203
Tel: 617-565-3348
Fax: 617-565-4939
E-mail: guest.david@epamail .epa.gov
Addr: George Hawkins, Senior Advisor
U.S. EPA, Region 1 (SPE)
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA. 02203
Tel: 617-565-9125
Fax: 617-565-4939
E-mail:
hawkins.george@epamail.epa.gov
Environmental Leadership Program-New
England. EPA's regional office in Boston is
conducting a regional environmental leadership
program to encourage and reward environmental
leadership and to experiment with alternative
models to achieve environmental compliance.
The region periodically requests applications for
businesses or other organizations that have
demonstrated a commitment to environmental
performance going beyond regulatory
compliance. Selected organizations receive
public recognition, and partner with the region to
experiment with alternative approaches. In many
cases, companies are experimenting with
approaches based on the ISO EMS, including
self-certification and mentoring EMS
implementation with customers and suppliers.
Addr: Gina Snyder, ELP Coordinator
U.S. EPA, Region 1 (SPE)
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
Tel: 617-860-4ELPor
Gina Snyder at 617-565 -9452
Fax: 617-565-4939
E-mail: snyder.gina@epamail .epa.gov
URL: http://es.inel.gov/elp
Compliance Leadership Through
Environmental Audits and Negotiation
(CLEAN). EPA's regional office in Boston has
launched an effort to improve environmental
management and performance in smaller
companies. In exchange for a commitment to
achieve performance, in part by adopting
pollution prevention practices, SMEs receive a
comprehensive compliance and pollution
prevention assessment by a partnership
comprising federal, state, and private sector
experts. The program is determining how these
assessments may include an analysis of EMS
based on 14000 to help these small companies
maintain compliance.
Addr: Austine Frawley, CLEAN Coordinator
2-10
-------
U.S. EPA, Region 1 (SPE)
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
Tel: 617-565-3231
Fax: 617-565-4939
E-mail:
frawley.austine@epamail.epa.gov
Region 3
ISO 14000 Project XL. The projects combine
the ISO 14000 standards with the requirements
of the Project XL initiative, thereby adding
greater environmental specificity to the usage of
ISO 14000 standards in the United States. As
the EMS is developed, EPA will focus on
defining superior environmental results,
establishing public involvement, developing
methods of pollution prevention, and improving
processes and results.
Addr: Alvin R. Morris
U.S. EPA Region 3
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Tel: 215-566-6701
Fax: 215-566-2301
E-mail: morris.alvin@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: Deborah Sabatini Hennelly
Lucent Technology
131 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Tel: 908-630-2814
Fax: 908-204-8865
Region 4
Using ISO 14000 in the Paper Industry. The
Weyerhaeuser Flint River Operations paper mill
has signed a Project XL Agreement with EPA.
The Weyerhaeuser paper mill will implement
ISO 14000 at its Flint River site in Georgia. The
overall objective of this XL Agreement will be to
half the solid waste at the facility, cut energy
consumption, reduce the toxic waste stream, and
set records for low water usage for a paper mill
of its size.
Addr: David B. Abbott
U.S. EPA Region 4
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Tel: 404-562-9631
Fax: 404-562-9598
E-mail: abbott.david@epamail .epa.gov
Addr: William (Bill) Patton (Project XL)
U.S. EPA Region 4
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Tel: 404-562-9610
Fax: 404-562-6598
E-mail: patton.bill@epamail.epa.gov
Region 5
Life Cycle Assessment Methodology. This
effort is developing and demonstrating Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) applications within industry
and government. Specifically, the focus has been
on streamlined LCA applications. Existing LCA
data is being analyzed using methods currently
employed by LCA practitioners. Areas of
demonstration include alternative adhesives for
auto interiors, recycled versus virgin newsprint
for newspapers, alternative cleaning systems,
fiberglass reinforced plastics, and composite
wood. The estimated completion date is
September 1997.
Addr: Mary Ann Curran
U.S. EPA,NRMRL
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
MS 466
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Tel: 513-569-7782
Fax: 513-569-7111
E-mail:
curran .maryann@epamail .epa.gov
Region 6
ISO 14000: A National Dialogue. This national
conference was one in a series of events designed
to facilitate a dialogue on issues surrounding ISO
14000 and its implementation. EPA Region 6
presented this conference in conjunction with the
2-11
-------
Global Environment & Technology Foundation
(GETF) and the University of Texas at Arlington
(UTA) on November 11-12, 1996, at the UTA
campus.
Addr: Bob Clark
EPA Region 6
Tel: 214-665-6487
Fax: 214-665-2168
Addr: Richard Cooper
GETF
Tel: 703-750-6401
Fax: 703-750-6506
Addr: Dr. Gerald Nehman
UTA
Tel: 817-272-2300
Region 8
EMS for Federal Facilities. EPA Region 8
conducted EMS reviews at selected federal
facilities in February 1997. In conjunction with
this activity, an EPA consultant offered training
in the ISO 14001 Standard.
Addr: Diane Thiel
U.S. EPA Region 8
Pollution Prevention Office (8P2-P2)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
Tel: 303-312-6389
Fax: 303-312-6741
E-mail: thiel.diane@epamail.epa.gov
Region 9
The Merit Partnership for Pollution
Prevention. The Merit Partnership for Pollution
Prevention is a "public-private partnership"
dedicated to the advancement of pollution
prevention technologies
and practices that both protect the environment
and aid economic growth.
Merit is developing a series of pilot projects to
demonstrate the environmental and economic
impacts of ISO 14001. The Merit ISO projects
will explore a number of issues, including the
effect of ISO 14001 on a company's
environmental insurance options, how ISO 14001
may affect companies' government procurement
opportunities, the accounting costs of the
development and implementation of ISO 14001,
and the effect of ISO 14001 on companies'
environmental compliance records.
Addr: Bonnie Barkett
U.S. EPA Region 9
75 Hawthorne St.
San Francisco, CA 94195
Tel: 415-744-1908
Fax: 415-744-1873
E-mail: barkett.bonnie@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: John French
ENVIRON Corporation
One Park Plaza, Suite 700
Irvine, CA 92714
Tel: 714-798-3691
Fax: 714-587-5151
E-mail: jfrench@environ.org
Region 10
Evaluation of Policy Implications of ISO
14000 and Other EMS Standards. The overall
objective of this effort will be to examine how
ISO 14000 and other EMS standards can help
make regulatory activities more effective
(reducing pollution) and efficient (reducing the
costs of assistance, compliance, and
enforcement). This assessment will include a
review of existing pilot projects and initiatives on
a regional and national level, a review of the
professional literature related to standards
deployment, and an analysis of what this
information implies for policy making and
regulatory reform efforts currently underway
within the region.
Addr: John Palmer, Pollution Prevention
Manager
U.S. EPA Region 10 (01-085)
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Tel: 206-553-6521
E-mail: palmer.john@epamail.epa.gov
2-12
-------
Srntt Riitnpr fsprnnr
Environment and Society Group
Battelle Seattle Research Center
4000 NE 41st Street
Seattle, WA 98105
Tel: 206-528-3290
Fax: 206-528-3552
E-mail: butner@battelle.org
URL: http://www.seattle.battelle.org
State of Washington Department of Ecology
ISO 14000 Leadership Project. Please see
Chapter 4, under Washington, for full listing.
3
OTHER FEDERAL
INITIATIVES
Many federal agencies besdies EPA are also interested in the ISO 14000 series of standards.
These range from the Department of Commerce, which has an interest in how the standards may
affect trade and competitiveness, to the U.S. Army, which is considering using IO 14001
management systems principles to manage their facilities. This chapter includes initiatives funded
and managed by federal government departments and agenicies other than EPA. The listed
initiatives explore the use of ISO 14000 in their respective jurisdictions and also application of
ISO 14000 within the departments or agencies themselves.
1. Department of Commerce
2. Department of Defense
3. Department of Energy
4. Department of State
5. Food and Drug Admnistration
6. Federal Trade Commission
7. U.S. Postal Service
-------
2-14
-------
-------
DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE
National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST)
Informational Paper. The NIST has published
an informational paper on the evolving ISO
14000 series.
Addr: Mary Saunders
Office of Standards Services
National Institute of Standards and
Technology
Building 820, Room 282
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Tel: 301-975-2396
Fax: 301-963-2871
E-mail: mary.saunders@nist.gov
URL: http://ts.nist.gov/ts/htdocs/
210/216/environ.html
Interagency Committee on Standards Policy's
EMS/ISO 14000 Workgroup. The operating
guide for the workgroup is to provide information
and recommendations to the Interagency
Committee on Standards Policy regarding
development and implementation of the ISO
14000. The committee has chosen to focus its
initial efforts on four main areas: 1)
implementation and integration with other
systems and federal role in pilots; 2) metrics and
evaluation of proposed indicators, cost
measurement, and relationship to current
indicators; 3) technical assistance and the role of
federal government in providing technical
assistance to NGOs, SMEs, other state and
federal government bodies; 4) procurement and
ISO 14000 fit with policies, contracting issues,
and federal acquisition regulations. The
workgroup is co-chaired by Ms. Mary McKiel of
EPA and Mr. Larry Stirling of DOE.
Addr: Krista Johnsen Leuteritz
Environmental Projects Manager
Office of Standard Services &
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
NIST
Building 301 Room C-100
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Tel: 301-975-5104
Fax: 301-963-2871
E-mail: kristin.leuteritz@nist.gov
Manufacturing Extension
Partnership (MEP)
Formerly the Manufacturing Technology Center
program, this partnership is a nationwide system
of manufacturing extension centers, state
planning nonprofit support, and coordinated
information, services, and resources. The
partnership is designed to bridge a technological
gap between sources of manufacturing
technology and the small- and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) that need to improve their
competitiveness through the use of appropriate
modern technologies, processes, and techniques.
Addr: Joyce Johannson
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
U.S. Department of Commerce/NIST
Building 224, Room Bl 15
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-0001
Tel: 301-975-5020
Fax: 301-963-6556
ISO 14000 Workgroup for the National P2
Roundtable. Please see Chapter 4, under North
Carolina, and Chapter 5, under Nongovernmental
Organizations, for full listing.
ISO 14000/EMS Gap Analysis Tool Suite. The
tool suite will include an implementation primer
that will detail protocol for implementation of an
EMS gap analysis with three appendices. A case
study of an EMS gap analysis used as a
screening tool by field engineers and consultants
for marketing, to present the benefits of ISO
14000 and EMS will be included. One initial
output from the screening tool will be a 1-2 page
letter with a visual attachment showing gaps in
conformance to ISO 14001. This gap analysis
will cover the main elements of the standard and
may lead to a detailed EMS gap analysis or an
implementation project. Also, the appendices
will illustrate the EMS gap analysis as a detailed
3-1
-------
ISO 14001 audit, and include an interpretation
guide (glossary of terms).
The tool will use a "look for ... and look at..."
type of format with a rating system for the field
engineer or consultant to rank the company on a
per-element basis. This project is being created
by a consortium of MEP centers, private firms,
and NIST-MEP.
Addr: Krista Johnsen Leuteritz
Environmental Projects Manager
Office of Standard Services &
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
NIST
Building 301 Room C-100
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Tel: 301-975-5104
Fax: 301-963-2871
E-mail: kristin.leuteritz@nist.gov
Addr: Stan Carson
Environmental Program Manager
Lake Erie MEP
1700 North Westwood Avenue
Toledo, OH 43 607-1207
Tel: 419-534-3705
Fax: 419-531-8465
E-mail: stan.carson@eisc.org
GreenscoreTM. GreenscoreTM is an
environmental self-assessment tool.
Addr: Paul Chalmer
NCMS
3025 Boardwalk Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48108-3266
Tel: 313-995-4911
Fax: 313-995-1150
E-mail: paul.chalmer@ncms.org
URL: http://www.ncms.org
Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing
(ECM). Please see Chapter 4, under Maine, for
full listing.
ISO 14000 Awareness for Maryland
Manufacturers. Please see Chapter 4, under
Maryland, for full listing.
Vermont Manufacturing Extension Center.
Please see Chapter 4, under Vermont, for full
listing.
DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE (DOD)
Environmental Management
Systems Committee
The Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of
Defense for Environmental Security has
established an Environmental Management
Systems Committee to examine the feasibility of
implementing EMS, such as the ISO 14000
series. In addition to work within the
Department, DOD is working with North
American Trade Organization (NATO) and
Partnership for Peace nations (Eastern European
nations, the newly independent Baltic/Slavic
states, Finland, and Sweden) to determine how
environmental management systems can be
implemented in the military. The purpose of
DOD analysis of environmental management
systems is to determine whether adoption of
environmental management standards will
improve the quality of DOD's environmental
programs through the application of uniform
quality management techniques.
Addr: Andrew M. Forth
3400 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-3400
Tel: 703-604-1820
Fax: 703-607-3124
E-mail: portham@acq.osd.mil
U.S. Army
Adoption of ISO 14000 Methodologies for
Environmental LCA being conducted on
weapon systems and materials. The Systems
Life Cycle Readiness Office, Armament
Research and Development Command, acts as a
bridge between the developer and the producer of
new materials and systems. Key aspects include
life cycle evaluations of producibility and
environmental impacts, costs, and risks. This
3-2
-------
office conducts environmental LCAs (research
and development, production, fielding and
storage, and disposal) of new components or
systems. It also works closely with operating
sites on environmental management plans and
initiatives on pollution prevention and
compliance. This parallels industry's life cycle
stages and activities as addressed by EPA,
Society of Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry (SETAC), and ISO 14000.
Recent DOD guidance on Acquisition Strategy
has strengthened many areas of LCAs that are
parallel with emerging SETAC and ISO
guidance.
Addr: Lawrence R. Laibson
Systems Life Cycle Readiness Office
AMSMC-STA-AR-SRE
Building 172
Picatinny Arsenal, NJ. 07806-5000
Tel: 201-724-2822
Fax: 201-724-4096
E-mail: llaibson@pica.army.mil
URL: http://www.pica.army .mil./orgs/slcro/
top.html
Total Quality Environmental Management
(TQEM) - Green Initiatives. This program is a
U.S. Army Armament Research, Development,
& Engineering Center (ARDEC) program that
provides linkage between current quality
initiatives and programs in environmental
stewardship. The pilot programs will be
implemented by industry and government
partners who will voluntarily adopt the ISO
14000 environmental management system
standards. By achieving ISO 9000/14000
certification, Army contractors and government
facilities will improve quality, reduce operations
costs, and develop products for both U.S. and
foreign military sales; enhance their competitive
position and facilities reputation; and reduce
government oversight. Finally, the pilot
programs will also offer an excellent opportunity
to partner with U.S. Army materiel contractors to
jointly pursue acquisition reform strategies.
Addr: Henry J. Van Dyke III
U.S. Army Armament Research
Development and Engineering Center
Industrial Ecology Center
Product Assurance
Attn: AMSTA-AR-ET(QA)
Building 172
Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000
Tel: 201-724-4071
or DSN 880-4071
Fax: 201-724-6759
E-mail: henryv@pica.army.mil
URL: http://www.pica.army.mil/orgs/
eto/top.html
ISO 14001 Feasibility Initiative. The U.S.
Army is evaluating the applicability of the ISO
14001 standard to the facility's existing
environmental programs. With assistance from
Concurrent Technologies Corporation, this
initiative will explore the current status of the
environmental programs at the DOD facility,
identify the missing ISO 14001 requirements or
"gaps" between these programs and the EMS
standard; the standard requirements and the
associated costs and benefits of modification; and
realign and adopt ISO 14001 requirements.
Addr: John Thorns
Concurrent Technologies Corporation
1450 Scalp Avenue
Johnstown, PA 15904
Tel: 814-269-6805
Fax: 814-269-2798
E-mail: thoms@ctc.com
URL: http://www.ctc.com
Air Force ISO 14001
Workshops
A series of ISO 14001 primers and introductory,
overview, and implementation workshops for the
U.S. Air Force Materiel Command, in
conjunction with Concurrent Technologies
Corporation, will be initiated. Headquarters and
base-level training are to be provided. Training
will be specifically directed to DOD requirements
and mission-specific activities.
Addr: Joe Hollingsworth
3-3
-------
Concurrent Technologies Corporation
Suite 165
Fairborn, OH 45324
Tel: 513-429-6178
Fax: 513-429-6178
E-mail: hollings@ctc.com
URL: http://www.ctc.com
U.S. Navy EMS Evaluation
The U.S. Navy is evaluating EMS and ISO
14000 as they pertain to Navy operations to
identify and quantify any value added by their
implementation. This effort will lead to the
development of U.S. Navy policy on EMS and/or
ISO 14000.
Addr: Catharine Cyr
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations
2211 South Clark Place
Arlington, VA 22244-5108
Tel: 703-602-5335
Fax: 703-602-2676
E-mail: cyrc@N4.opnav.navy.mil
Addr: Terry Bowers
Office of the Chief of Naval Operations
Arlington, VA 22244-5108
Tel: 703-602-4769
Fax: 703-602-5547
E-mail: bowerst@N4 .opnav .navy .mil
Naval Surface Warfare Center
(NSWC) Carderock ISO
14000 Implementation and
Certification
NSWC Carderock is pursuing its first ISO
14000 certification at its Philadelphia site. Gap
analysis has been completed and process
documentation is underway as of March, 1997.
ISO 14000 is being pursued in an attempt to gain
competitive advantage, to reduce risk in
environmental programs by establishing
consistent and repeatable processes, to reduce
dependence on personality-driven environmental
programs, and to establish a framework for
managing environmental impacts.
Addr: Sondra Gutkind
Naval Surface Warfare Center,
Carderock Division
Philadelphia, PA 19112-5083
Tel: 215-897-7828
Fax: 215-897-7030
E-mail: gutkind@oasys.dt.navy.mil
DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY (DOE)
Energy Facilities Contractors
Group (EFCOG) ISO 14000
Working Group
EFCOG is a self-directed group of senior level
contractor executives who manage and operate
DOE laboratories, manufacturing and production
facilities, and environmental restoration projects.
EFCOG member companies have joined together
for the purpose of exchanging management and
technical information in areas of mutual interest.
EFCO's objective is to promote, coordinate,
facilitate, encourage, and support information
exchanges between facilities on successful
programs, practices, procedures, and lessons
learned. The ISO 14000 Working Group (ISO
14000 WG) is a working committee whose intent
is to facilitate the objectives of EFCOG as
related to the particular area of EMS. The
purposes of the ISO 14000 WG include
promoting excellence in DOE EMS by sharing
information and lessons learned, facilitating the
exchange of information and experiences in
implementing the ISO 14000 series of EMS
standards, and communicating the implications
for integrating strategic environment, safety, and
health management programs into the daily
operations at DOE sites. Working group
participation will provide EFCOG member
companies the opportunity to exchange
information and to discuss the benefits of ISO
14000.
Addr: Larry Stirling
U.S. Department of Energy
3-4
-------
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-586-0955
E-mail: john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
Addr: George D. Greenly, Jr., CCM, QEP,
Chairman
Battelle-Pantex
P.O. Box 30020 (12-132)
Amarillo, TX 79120-0020
Tel: 806-477-5955
Fax: 806-477-5518
E-mail: ggreenly@pantex.com
Addr: Diane Meier, Vice Chair
Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory
L-197
20201 Century Boulevard, First Floor
Germantown, MD 20874
Tel: 301-916-7719
Fax: 301-916-7777
E-mail: meier6@llnl.gov
EMS Fact Sheets
DOE's Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance is developing a series of fact sheets
addressing topics related to EMS. The fact
sheets provide basic information and
communicate DOE's approach to EMS issues.
Topics in the series consist of frequently asked
questions; getting started; EPA's Code of
Environmental Management Principles (CEMP);
identifying environmental aspects and impacts;
and pollution prevention. A PNNL team is
supporting the project.
Addr: Larry Stirling
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-586-0955
E-mail:
john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
Addr: Dr. Jean Shorett
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
901 D Street, SW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20024-2115
Tel: 202-646-7809
Fax: 202-646-7838
E-mail: je_shorett@pnl.gov
Environmental Management
Systems at DOE
DOE's Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance (EH-41) is actively evaluating uses of
the ISO 14001 EMS Standard in improving the
environmental sensitivity of DOE operations.
This effort comprises an expanding list of
activities, such as drafting and releasing a
Secretarial memorandum encouraging ISO 14001
use in the field; integrating EMS with DOE's
Integrated Safety Management System; preparing
EMS guidance documents and fact sheets; raising
awareness through panel discussions, invited
presentations, conferences, white papers, and
briefings; integrating EMS with National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), pollution
prevention, and contract reform; organizing an
internal EMS Work Group, a baseline survey of
EMS awareness at DOE facilities, ISO 14001
training and technical assistance to sites; working
with DOE's Energy Facility Contractor Group
and posting a Web site on ISO activities linked to
DOE's home page. DOE is also collaborating
with EPA on EMS issues. DOE also works with
EPA's Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement to
produce an EMS Primer for Federal Facilities,
co-chairs an EMS Interagency Working Group
with EPA's Mary McKiel, and provides review
and comment on CEMP, which DOE has
endorsed.
Addr: Larry Stirling
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
3-5
-------
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-586-0955
E-mail: john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
EMS Primer for Federal
Facilities
Please see Chapter 2, Headquarters Initiatives,
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement, for full
listing.
Implementation of ISO 14001 at
Westinghouse-Managed DOE Sites.
Westinghouse is reviewing and modifying its
environmental management systems to ensure
they conform to the ISO 14001 standard at three
sites it manages for the Department of Energy:
the Savannah River Site, near Aiken, SC; the
West Valley Demonstration Project, near West
Valley, NY; and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant,
near Carlsbad, NM. A fourth operation, Safe
Sites of Colorado (a Westinghouse and Babcox
and Wilcox joint venture), is also working to
ensure its EMS conforms to the standard. Safe
Sites of Colorado is a subcontractor for Kaiser-
Hill, the integrating contractor for the DOE at its
Rocky Flats site near Golden, CO.
Addr: Larry Stirling
Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-86-0955
E-mail: john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
Addr: Tom DuPlessis
Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Environmental Affairs Department,
Government ES&H Programs
11 Stanwix Street, Room 2181
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1384
Tel: 412-642-3990
Fax: 412-642-3224
E-mail: dupleste@westinghouse .com
Strategic and Program Planning for EMS
Initiatives. DOE has been a leader in evaluating
uses of the ISO 14001 EMS Standard in
improving management of its environmental
activities. Initiatives consist of EMS strategic
and program planning; linking EMS to other
agency initiatives (e.g., integrated Environmental
Health & Safety, NEPA, pollution prevention);
using ISO 14001 in streamlining internal
directives; analyzing statutory and regulatory
impacts; preparing EMS technical materials;
developing program and field implementation
strategies; developing fact sheets, briefings, and
guidance materials; coauthoring technical papers;
preparing presentations; and supporting internal
and interagency EMS working groups. Since
1994, a PNNL team has provided support in
developing these activities.
Addr: Larry Stirling
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Policy and
Assistance, EH-41
1000 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20585
Tel: 202-586-2417
Fax: 202-586-0955
E-mail: john.stirling@hq.doe.gov
Addr: Dr. Jean Shorett
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
901 D Street, SW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20024-2115
Tel: 202-646-7809
Fax: 202-646-7838
E-mail: je_shorett@pnl.gov
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
(DOS)
US-Asia Environmental
Partnership (US-AEP)
Led by the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID), US-AEP
3-6
-------
was founded in 1992 to assist in addressing
environmental degradation and sustainable
development issues in the Asia/Pacific region by
mobilizing U.S. environmental experience,
technology, and practice. The program brings
together 25 U.S. government departments and
agencies and thousands of businesses and
nongovernmental organizations that work with 35
nations and territories in Asia and the Pacific.
US-AEP activities focus on the objective of
promoting an Asian "clean revolution" the
extensive continuing development and adoption
of continuously less polluting and more resource
efficient products, processes, and services in the
Asian region. While individual US-AEP
activities seek practical solutions to local
problems, the cumulative effort positively affects
global environmental issues.
Addr: Lewis P. Reade, Director General
US-Asia Environmental Partnership
U.S. Agency for International
Development
Department of State
Washington, DC 20523
Tel: 202-647-5806
Fax: 202-647-1805
E-mail: lreade@usaid.gov
URL: http://www.usaep.org
US-AEP Clean Technology and Environmental
Management Initiative (CTEM). Under this
initiative, US-AEP works with Asian
governments, industries, professional
associations, and trade academic institutions to
promote cleaner methods of production.
Activities focus on incentives that persuade
companies to refine environmental practices;
enhancing the capacity of those businesses to
respond to incentives; and the transfer of
technology that takes advantage of the incentives
and capacities within a given business, industrial
sector or country. Through consultations,
seminars, workshops, and exchanges, these
activities promote the understanding and
adoption of voluntary standards for corporate
environmental management.
Addr: Julie Haines, Managing Director,
CTEM
U.S.-Asia Environmental Partnership
1720 Eye Street, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: 202-835-0333
Fax: 202-835-0366
E-mail: jhaines@usaep.org
URL: http://www.usaep.org
US-AEP Clean Technology and Environmental
Management Information Centers (CTEM).
CTEM Information Centers provide accurate and
timely information to the Asian business
community. Each center is staffed with an
information specialist who uses in-house print
and electronic resources, the Internet, and
personal contacts to promote the CTEM concept.
Addr: Mr. Enrico Rubio, Information
Specialist
G/F DAP Building
San Miguel Avenue, Pasig City
Metro Manila, 1601, Philippines
Tel: +63-2-635-2650
Fax: +63-2-631-5714
E-mail: ctem@mnl.cyb-live.com
Addr: Ms. Kavita Gandhi, Information
Specialist
SMA House
20 Orchard Road #02-00
Singapore 238830
Tel: +65-338-8787/331-1586 (DID)
Fax: +65-338-5906
E-mail: ctemsin@pacific.net.sg
Addr: Kerith McFadden, Information
Specialist
1720 Eye Street, NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: 202-835-8357
Fax: 202-496-9720
E-mail: kmcfadden@usaep.org
US-AEP Environmental Exchange Program
(EEP). US-AEP's EEP provides Asian
professionals and organizations with
3-7
-------
opportunities for addressing critical
environmental needs by identifying sources for
U.S. technology, observing and evaluating
facilities first-hand for their suitability, meeting
with potential partners, and conferring with U.S.
government and industry authorities. The
program helps link leading ISO 14000 experts in
the United States to top 5 industry leaders and
environmental professionals in Asia to discuss
EMS standards and their implications for
industry.
Addr: Administrative Manager
Institute of International Education
1400 K Street, NW Suite 650
Washington, DC 20005-2403
Tel: 202-326-7706
Fax: 202-326-7709
E-mail: eep@iie.org
URL: http://www.usaep.org
FOOD AND DRUG
ADMINISTRATION (FDA)
Standards Policy Committee
The Standards Policy Committee is composed of
senior FDA management officials who set
agency-wide policy with respect to the
development and use of standards. FDA
employees actively participate with a variety of
private standards organizations, both domestic
and international. FDA develops product
standards, criteria for the assessment of test data,
and enforcement procedures, and also includes
ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 for quality and
environment management system registration.
Addr: Linda Horton, Director of International
Policy
FDA/Office of Policy
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 15-74 (HF-
23)
Rockville, MD 20857
Tel: 301-827-3344
Fax: 301-443-6906
E-mail: lhorton@bangate.fda.gov
URL: http://www/fda.gov
FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION (FTC)
Environmental Marketing
Claims Guidelines
These 1992 guides are administrative
interpretations of laws administered by the FTC
to help public comply with the law covering
environmental marketing claims. Inconsistent
conduct may result in corrective action taken by
the FTC under §5 of the FTC Act, which
prohibits false or deceptive claims in advertising
or labeling. The guidelines focus on what
environmental claims mean to consumers and are
meant to bolster consumers' confidence in
environmental claims and reduce manufacturers
uncertainty about which claims might lead to
FTC law enforcement actions. The guidelines
address general environmental benefit claims and
the use of terms such as degradate, recyclable,
recycled, source reduction, refillable, and ozone-
safe claims.
Addr: Michael Dershowitz
Federal Trade Commission
Division of Advertising Practices
601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580
Tel: 202-326-3158
Fax: 202-326-3259
URL: http://www.ftc.gov
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
(USPS)
Development of ISO
9000/14000 Protocol for Fleet
Maintenance Activities
USPS - Southeast Area is in the initial stage of
developing an ISO protocol that will blend the
3-8
-------
quality improvement aspect of ISO 9000 with the
environmental improvements associated with ISO
14000.
The USPS's Southeast Area fleet management
organization provides operations and
maintenance support to approximately 25,000
USPS-owned vehicles assigned throughout a
five-state area. By combining ISO 9000 and ISO
14000 protocol, USPS anticipates providing a
more uniform, cost effective process of fleet
management while improving the
environmentally sensitive aspects of operating a
large commercial fleet.
Developing this protocol should begin in early
1997, with : first article" roll out anticipated in
Fall 1997.
Addr. Robert Martin
Southeast Area Office - USPS
225 N. Humphreys Boulevard
Memphis, TN 38166-0860
Tel: 901-747-7635
Fax: 901-747-7482
3-9
-------
-------
4
STATE
INITIATIVES
State governments are examining ISO 14000 and its relevance to state environmental complaince
and permitting activities. States are also providing technical assistance to organizations interested
in ISO 14000. Besides the initiatives directly managed by state governmental agencies, this
chapter includes other geographically based initiatives such as those of the national Institute of
Standards manufacturing Extension partnership Centers.
1. Alphabetical Listings by State
-------
-------
MULTI-STATE WORK
GROUP
The Multi-State Work Group on environmental
management systems includes representatives
from California, Texas, Oregon, Arizona,
Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts, and North Carolina. The Work
Group has prepared a voluntary project design
document, including a Project Evaluation Matrix,
which can be used by states and others in the
design of projects involving ISO 14001.
Addr: Dr. Robert Stephens
CAL/EPA
Dept. of Toxic Substances Control
Hazardous Materials Laboratory
2151 Berkeley Way, Room 515
Berkeley, CA 94704
Tel: 510-540-3003
Fax: 510-540-2305
ALABAMA
Department of Environmental
Management
Alabama is in the preliminary stages of
investigating possible application.
Addr: Richard E. Grusnick, Deputy Director
Alabama Department of Environmental
Management
P.O. Box 301463
Montgomery, AL 36130-1463
Tel: 334-271-7710
Fax: 334-271-7950
E-mail: adem(3>state.al.us
ARKANSAS
ISO 14000 Infrastructure
Development
Westark College Business and Industrial Institute
is partnering with the Arkansas Department of
Pollution Control and Ecology to develop ISO
14000 training. This training will support
efforts of Arkansas companies to develop and
implement EMS that can be certified to ISO
14000.
Addr: Mike Jones
Westark College
P.O. Box 3649
5210 Grand Avenue
Ft. Smith, AR 72413-3 649
Tel: 501-788-7763
Fax: 501-788-7780
E-mail: mjones@systema.westark.edu
CALIFORNIA
CAL/EPA ISO 14000 Pilot
Project
CAL/EPA will conduct two to four pilot
demonstration projects to test and evaluate the
utility of an EMS in achieving and maintaining
compliance with regulatory requirements,
continuing environmental improvement, and
streamlining regulatory procedures.
Addr: Robert Stephens, Chair
CAL/EPA Task Force on ISO 14000
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Hazardous Materials Laboratory
2151 Berkeley Way, Room 515
Berkeley, CA 94704
Tel: 510-540-3003
Fax: 510-540-2305
San Francisco Bay Area
Green Business Program
Businesses in full environmental compliance with
relevant multimedia regulations (air, land, and
water) and meeting program defined, industry-
specific standards for energy and water
conservation, solid waste reduction, and pollution
prevention will be recognized as "green." After
local governments certify the company as green,
4-1
-------
it may then use the program logo in its
advertising to attract environmentally conscious
consumers. This program does not include
standards for an EMS per se.
Addr: Jennifer Krebs, Senior Environmental
Planner
Association of Bay Area Governments
Oakland, CA 94604
Tel: 510-464-7977
Fax: 510-464-7980
E-mail: jenniferk@abag.ca.gov
COLORADO
Pollution Prevention Program
The Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment has included ISO 14000 as a
possible criterion in a proposed program that
would reduce government oversight and provide
financial incentives to companies who excel in
environmental performance.
Addr: Parry Burnap
Pollution Prevention Program
OE B2 PPU Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive North
Denver, CO 80222-1530
Tel: 303-692-3009
Fax: 303-782-4969
E-mail: parry.burnap@state.co.us
CONNECTICUT
Common Sense Initiative, and
StarTrack Pilot Project
As part of EPA's Common Sense Initiative,
Environmental Leadership Program and
StarTrack Initiatives in Connecticut, the state of
Connecticut is participating in pilot projects that
focus on EMS and ISO 14000.
Addr: Robert Kaliszewski, Ombudsman
State of Connecticut, DEP
79 Elm Street
Hartford, CT 06106-5127
Tel: 860-424-3003
Fax: 860-424-4077
E-mail: robert.kaliszewski@po.state.ct.us
URL: http://www.state.ct.us/dep
DELAWARE
Department of Natural
Resources
Delaware is tracking and investigating ISO
14000 activities of other interested states.
Addr: Nicholas A. DiPasquale, Director
Division of Air & Waste Management
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 1401
89 Kings Highway
Dover, DE 19903
Tel: 302-739-4764
Fax: 302-739-5060
E-mail: ndipasquale@dnrec.state.de.us
FLORIDA
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
(FDEP)
EMS help ensure compliance with state and
federal regulations and requirements, and can
serve as a mechanism to guide improvement in
environmental performance. FDEP is working
closely with the business community to foster a
cooperative spirit of putting well-crafted EMS in
place.
Addr: Michael Phillips
FDEP
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard (18)
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
Tel: 904-921-9717
Fax: 904-488-7093
4-2
-------
E-mail: phillips_M@epic9.dep.state .fl .us
URL: http://www.dep.state.fl.us
GEORGIA
Pollution Prevention
Assistance Division (P2AD)
P2AD provides industry within the state
information regarding ISO 14000. This is done
through P2AD newsletters, assessments, and
participation in industry conferences.
Addr. Matt Barcaskey
Georgia P2AD
7 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive,
Suite 450
Atlanta, GA 30334
Tel: 404-651-5120
Fax: 404-651-5130
E-mail: p2ad@ix.netcom.com
URL: http://www.dnr.state.ga.us
IDAHO
Idaho Manufacturing
Alliance
The executive director currently conducts ISO
14000 training workshops across the state of
Idaho.
Addr: Jim Steinfort, Executive Director
Idaho Manufacturing Alliance
Boise State University
1910 University Drive
Boise, ID 83725
Tel: 208-385-3689
Fax: 208-385-3877
E-mail: jsteinf@idbsu.bsu.edu
INDIANA
Small Business Pilot Project
The Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) and EPA plan to undertake
three to five pilot projects as part of the
thermoset plastics sector of the Sustainable
Industry Project. The project has three distinct
goals: 1) to identify the problems faced by small
businesses trying to implement an EMS, 2) to
identify the infrastructure and support needed by
small businesses for EMS implementation, and 3)
to demonstrate a new regulatory regime for small
businesses.
IDEM and EPA have identified project resources
to help small businesses through the project,
including a) an IDEM grants program that in
place will help offset some of the costs in
implementing an EMS; b) technical assistance
from IDEM's Compliance and Technical
Assistance Program; c) additional technical
assistance from the Indiana Pollution Prevention
and Safe Materials Institute at Purdue
University; d) regional EPA technical assistance
from EPA Region 5; and, e) reporting and
permitting flexibility from IDEM and EPA.
Addr: Marc Hancock
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
100 North Senate Avenue
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206
Tel: 317-233-1043
Fax: 317-233-5627
E-mail: mhanc@opn.dem.state.in.us
URL: http://www.epa.gov/oppe/isd/indiana.htm
Addr: Carl Koch
U.S. EPA, OPPE
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: 202-260-2739
Fax: 202-260-9322
E-mail: koch.carl@epamail.epa.gov
URL: http://www.epa.gov/oppe/isd/isd.htm
4-3
-------
IOWA
Iowa Waste Reduction Center
(IWRC) EMS Assistance
Program
The IWRC provides ISO 14001 EMS
development assistance to small businesses in
Iowa.
Addr: Marci Carter
University of Northern Iowa
75 Biology Research Complex
Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0185
Tel: 319-273-2079
Fax: 319-273-2926
E-mail: carterm@uni.edu
URL: http//www.iwrc.uni.edu
Waste Reduction Assistance
Program (WRAP)
Through on-site assessments, workshops, and
continual support, WRAP provides
nonregulatory, confidential, no-cost assistance
designed to reduce wastes and enhance a
company's bottom line. The program targets
Iowa business and industry with more than 100
employees or those classified as RCRA large
quantity generators.
Addr: Beth Hicks
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
900 East Grand Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50309
Tel: 515-281-8927
Fax: 515-281-8895
E-mail: ehicks@max.state.ia.us.
URL: http://www.recyclelowa.org
KANSAS
Environmental Management
System
K.S.A. 60-332 et seq., enacted by the 1995
Kansas legislature, outlines the components of an
EMS. If a finding of violation occurs, a facility
that has implemented an EMS is afforded
consideration by the court or administrative
tribunal in determining whether to impose an
administrative, civil, or criminal penalty and the
severity of the penalty. The Kansas Department
of Health and Environment is actively
encouraging facilities to implement EMS.
Addr. Theresa Hedges
Kansas Department of Health and
Environment
Office of Science and Support
Building 283, Forbes Field
Topeka, KA 66620
Tel: 913-296-6603
Fax: 913-291-3266
KENTUCKY
Kentucky Pollution Prevention
Center's (KPPC) ISO 14000
Awareness
KPPC is facilitating ISO 14000 training through
contractors, partnerships with other assistance
providers, and by downlinking national
teleconferences. It has sponsored/presented two
2-day workshops in Louisville and Lexington,
KY. In addition, two 3-hour teleconferences
were downlinked in those two cities in October
1996. A presentation titled "An Overview of
ISO 14000" has been offered at conferences and
lecture series statewide. KPPC will continue to
provide training opportunities for Commonwealth
business as well as further identify its role in ISO
14000 implementation.
Addr: Cam Metcalf, Executive Director
Kentucky Pollution Prevention Center
420 New Academic Building
University of Louisville
Louisville, KY 40292
Tel: 502-852-0965
Fax: 502-852-0964
E-mail: j cmetcO 1 @ulkyvm .louisville .edu
4-4
-------
URL: http://www/louisville.edu/org/kppc
Fax:
504-765-0742
LOUISIANA
Department of Environmental
Quality
Environmental Leadership/ISO 14000. The
Louisville Department of Environmental Quality
(LDEQ) Office of Secretary is developing an
Environmental Leadership Program/ISO 14000
initiative for Louisiana's business and industry.
A coordinator provides consultation and
workshops to educate interested parties regarding
U.S. government policy regarding ISO 14000,
including environmental management systems
(EMS).
Addr: Gary Johnson/Hugh Finklea
Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 82263
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2263
Tel: 504-765-0720
Fax: 504-765-0742
E-mail: garyj@deq. state.la.us
Environmental Leadership
Pollution Prevention Program
This is a cooperative effort between the
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
and Louisiana's industry that encourages
companies to assume environmental leadership
roles by committing to minimizing their waste
streams in all media, and participating in
activities to enhance Louisiana's environment.
Addr: Charles Killebrew, Technical
Manager
Technical Program Support Section
Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality
Office of the Secretary
P.O. Box 82263
Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2263
Tel: 504-765-0720
MAINE
Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP)
As a component of the state's Environmental
Excellence: Maine Program, DEP works with
businesses developing EMS (including ISO
14000) to review gap analyses and provide
compliance assistance and regulatory review as
the plans are developed.
Addr: Ron Dyer
Maine DEP
STP#17
Augusta, ME 04333
Tel: 207-287-2811
Fax: 207-287-2814
E-mail: ron.e.dyer@state.me.us
Center for Technology
Transfer (CTT)
Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing
(ECM) Program. CTT is a private nonprofit
organization that works primarily with Maine's
metals and electronics industries to enhance their
competitiveness through training, technology
transfer, and technical assistance. ECM is one of
CTT's focus areas; pollution prevention
assessments, training, development literature,
conferences, and seminars were all initiated under
this program over the last 2 years. CTT will
work with its target industries to educate
companies on EMS and why they may or may
not want to become certified to ISO 14001.
Addr: Mark Arienti, P.E., Field Engineer
ECM Project
Center for Technology Transfer
190 Riverside Street
Portland, ME 04103
Tel: 207-871-8254
Fax: 207-780-1547
E-mail: marienti@mstf.org
4-5
-------
URL: http://www.ctt.org
EMS Development for
Industry - Electric Power
Sector
The Central Maine Power Company and the
Natsionalna Elektricheska Kompania of Bulgaria
are working on a U.S. AID-funded effort to
develop EMS for major power plants in Bulgaria
and for the central electric utility system.
Bulgaria has adopted environmental standards
similar to those of western Europe and the United
States, however, both the plant equipment and
the management systems are dated in terms of
being able to meet these standards. This initiative
will help the management side of environmental
businesses. One major power plant was selected
for system development; at the discretion of the
Natsionalna Elektricheska Kompania, the EMS
techniques will be transferred to the rest of the
system.
Addr: James H. Wazlaw
Central Maine Power International
One Grandview Place
Winthrop, ME 04364
Tel: 207-626-9749
Fax: 207-626-959
Addr: Hristo Shwabsky
Natsionalna Elektricheska Kompania
Sofia, Bulgaria
Tel: 359 2 980 1968
Fax: 359 2 875826
E-mail: nek.s.msp@mcrl .poptel.org.uk
Addr: Dr. Robert Ichord, Jr.
U.S.AID
320 21st Street NW
Washington, DC 20523
Tel: 202-647-6962
Fax: 202-647-8274
(Cross-listed with International Initiatives,
chapter 6)
MARYLAND
Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE)
MDE conducts various ISO 14000 training
programs for management and field personnel.
Addr: Mitch McCalmon
Maryland Department of the
Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
Tel: 410-631-4499
Fax: 410-631-3896
ISO 14000 Awareness for
Maryland Manufacturers
Various agencies, public and private
organizations in Maryland are making significant
strides in identifying and providing ISO 14000
related information and awareness training
throughout Maryland. The Environmental
Engineering Program of the University of
Maryland's Engineering Research Center (ERC)
has begun an initiative to assist these efforts,
identifying potentially interested participants,
promoting the program, and assisting with
presentation as requested. Primary efforts to date
have been with the regional offices of the ER's
Technology Extension Service (an affiliate of the
Maryland NISTMEP), the Maryland Department
of the Environment, and various local technology
councils.
Addr: Paul Gietka
University of Maryland at Baltimore
618 West Lombard Street, 1st Floor
Baltimore, MD 21201
Tel: 410-706-3233
Fax: 410-706-3446
E-mail: pg26@umail.umd.edu
MICHIGAN
4-6
-------
Clean Corporate Citizen
Program
This program gives businesses tangible
incentives and benefits, such as faster permits,
expanded construction and operational waivers,
and plantwide applicable limits for air permits.
Such benefits are attainable by meeting three
criteria: 1) a demonstrated commitment to reduce
waste through a pollution prevention program; 2)
consistent compliance with all environmental
requirements and no outstanding unresolved
violations; and 3) a strong and effective EMS
such as ISO 14001.
Addr: Robert Basch, Chief
Technical Assistance Section,
Environmental Assistance Division
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 30457
Lansing, MI 48909-7957
Tel: 517-335-7161
Fax: 517-373-3675
E-mail: baschr@deq.state.mi.us
MINNESOTA
Office of Attorney General
EMS Training. The initiative involves two
projects designed to improve EMS training. The
first project involves a series often seminars on
various aspects of environmental management
including ISO 14000; the primary audience is
larger businesses. The second project focuses on
smaller businesses and will include five separate
training sessions that incorporate environmental
management elements into small business
manufacturing excellence programs.
Banking/Insurance Initiative. This is an effort
to identify the risk reduction and competitiveness
advantages of good EMS and to inform bankers,
insurers, and investors of these advantages. ISO
14000 certification and implementation could
conceivably be used as a tool in measuring likely
improved performance.
Addr: Lee Paddock
Office of Attorney General
900 NCL Tower
445 Minnesota Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-2127
Tel: 612-296-6597
Fax: 612-297-4139
E-mail: lee.paddock@state.mn.us
MISSOURI
ISO 14000 Cooperation
Project
This project supports research and educational
activities within Missouri state government and
with nongovernmental groups, including a joint
relationship with the National Center for
Environmental and Information Technology in
St. Louis.
Addr: Steve Mahfood
Missouri Environmental Improvement
and Energy Resources Authority
P.O. Box 744
325 Jefferson
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Tel: 573-751-4919
Fax: 573-635-3486
NEBRASKA
Department of Environmental
Quality (NDEQ)
Quality Assurance Implementation for Technical
Policy and Independent Technical Oversight of
Low Level Radioactive Wastes Application.
NDEQ has the regulatory oversight and licensing
authority, in conjunction with the Nebraska
Health and Human Services (HHS), for licensing
commercial low level waste disposal under
10XFR Part 61 in the state of Nebraska. NDEQ
was charged with license review and independent
technical assessment under NDEQ title 132 and
NDOH Title 180. NDEQ developed a
comprehensive quality assurance program using
4-7
-------
NUREG 1293/NUREG 1383 andNQA-1. The
program incorporates requirements to address
NRC Reg. Guide 415. Over a seven year period,
the quality assurance implementation has been
successfully implemented to over 200 personnel
and covers all elements of technical review and
oversight process. NDEQ has successfully
implemented a "graded approach" to audits and
surveillance that had never been implemented to
this level for license review. It is unique for
government oversight for state regulatory license
review.
Addr: Jay D. Ringenberg , LLRW Program
Manager
Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 98922
1200 N Street, Suite 400, The Atrium
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
Tel: 402-471-3372
Fax: 402-471-2909
NEW HAMPSHIRE
New Hampshire Pollution
Prevention Program (NHPPP)
This nonregulatory pollution prevention program
offers technical assistance services such as
conferences and workshops, information
requests, onsite assistance, pollution prevention
information clearinghouse, internships,
educational curricula, pollution prevention
regulatory integration, and strategic partnerships.
Addr: Vincent R. Perelli, NHPPP Manager
New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services Pollution
Prevention Program
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301-6509
Tel: 603-271-2902
Fax: 603-271-2456
E-mail: perelli@deswmdpl.mv.com
NEW MEXICO
Green Zia Environmental
Excellence Program
The Green Zia program will recognize
businesses, institutions, and governmental entities
that have met specific criteria for achieving
environmental excellence: 1) long-term
compliance with all environmental regulations
and development of a pollution prevention plan;
2) achievement of specified pollution prevention
goals outlined in the plan; and 3) achievement of
additional goals and mentorship in pollution
prevention technologies for other businesses,
institutions or governmental entities. The criteria
for receiving recognition will be developed with
input from regulators and industry
representatives, and will include ISO 14000
conformance. The program should be
implemented in mid-1997.
Addr: Judy Kowalski
Forestry and Resources Conservation
Division
Energy, Minerals, and Natural
Resources Department
P.O. Box 1948
Santa Fe,NM 87504-1948
Tel: 505-827-7474
Fax: 505-827-3903
E-mail: jkowalski@emnrdsfstate.nm.us
NEW YORK
ISO 14000 Regulatory
Integration Pilot Program
The Department of Environmental Conservation
is developing two pilot projects with one small
business and one large business to explore how
ISO 14000 certification can be incorporated into
regulatory oversight programs.
Addr: William Eberle
NYSDEC
50 Wolf Road
4-8
-------
Albany, NY 12233-8010
Tel: 518-457-2553
Fax: 518-457-2570
NORTH CAROLINA
The North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Environmental Management Systems. The
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources has formed a
workgroup to look at the use of EMS.
Specifically, the group will be involved in pilot
projects, internal training, gaining support of
external groups, and policy development.
Addr: Ravila Gupta
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 29569
Raleigh, NC 27626
Tel: 919-715-6507
Fax: 919-715-6794
E-mail: ravila_gupta@owr. ehnr. state .nc .us
ISO 14000 Workgroup for the National P2
Roundtable. The first official meeting of this
group was held in November 1996 as part of the
National Pollution Prevention (P2) Roundtable's
regular workgroup meetings. Some example
issues addressed were: How can P2 mesh with
the standard? Will P2 be included in the auditor
training and if so, how? What is the role of
technical assistance personnel? Can small- and
medium-sized manufacturers benefit from ISO
14000 and what are some of their implementation
issues? Will the standard lead to source
reduction? This workgroup will generate and
maintain an ISO 14000 e-mail list.
Addr: Ravila Gupta
P.O. Box 29569
Raleigh, NC 27626
Tel: 919-715-6507
Fax: 919-715-6794
E-mail: ravila_gupta@owr. ehnr. state .nc .us
Addr: Krista Johnsen Leuteritz
NIST/MEP
Building 301, Room C-100
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Tel: 301-975-5104
Fax: 301-926-3787
E-mail: kristin.johnsen@nist.gov
URL: http://www.mep.nist.gov/
NORTH DAKOTA
Wetland Conservation
Strategy
This multifunctional program includes a variety
of incentive programs and demonstrations to
encourage restriction and preservation of the
state's substantial wetland resources.
Addr: Lee Klapprodt
North Dakota State Water
Commission
900 East Bird
Bismarck, ND 58501
Tel: 701-328-2750
Fax: 701-328-3696
E-mail: lklap@water.swc.state.nd.us
URL: http://water.swc.state.nd.us
OHIO
ISO 14000 Information
Gathering
The Ohio Office of Pollution Prevention is
presently gathering information about the ISO
14000 series of voluntary standards.
Addr: Andrea Futrell
Ohio EPA
Office of Pollution Prevention
P.O. Box 1049
4-9
-------
Columbus, OH 43216-1049
Tel: 614-644-2813
Fax: 614-726-1245
E-mail: andrea_futrell@central .epa. ohio .gov
URL: http://www.epa.ohio.gov/opp/
oppmain.html
OKLAHOMA
Department of Environmental
Quality
The Pollution Prevention Program provides
technical assistance to business and industry
across the state of Oklahoma. It also houses a
clearinghouse of up-to-date information on
pollution prevention advances in various
industries, reference materials, and journals. ISO
14000 activities consist of educating program
members about the standards.
Addr: Leisa Smith
Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality
1000 NE 10
Oklahoma City, OK 73117-1212
Tel: 405-271-1400 or 800-869-1400
Fax: 405-271-1317
OREGON
Environmental Action
Agreement Project
The Department of Environmental Quality's
Pollution Prevention Core Committee is
developing the framework of a program that will
provide regulatory incentives for companies that
demonstrate environmental performance beyond
that required by law. Details of how companies
qualify for participation and what types of
rewards will be offered are still being determined.
In order to qualify to be part of the
Environmental Action Agreement Project,
participants must have 1) an EMS in place that
assures compliance with mandated environmental
requirements, 2) some supplemental activities
that demonstrate protection of the environment
beyond that required by law, and 3) some
mechanism for public communication about the
facility's environmental performance.
Possible rewards include both a recognition
program and some regulatory relief, such as
expedited permit processing, reduced monitoring
and reporting frequency, and enforcement
discretion. A workgroup will convene to develop
these ideas and develop recommendations for
turning pilot efforts into a full-scale incentive
program.
Addr: Holly Schroeder
DEQ Northwest Region
2020 SW Fourth Avenue
Portland, OR 97201
Tel: 503-229-5585
Fax: 503-229-6945
E-mail: holly.schroeder@state.or.us
URL: http://www.deq.state.or.us
Addr: Marianne Fitzgerald, Coordinator
DEQ Pollution Prevention
811 SW Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
Tel: 503-229-5946
Fax: 503-229-5850
E-mail: marianne.fitzgerald@state.or.us
URL: http://www.deq.state.or.us
PENNSYLVANIA
Strategic Environmental
Management: Beyond
Compliance
Strategic Environmental Management is a
regulatory approach that incorporates ISO 14001
environmental accounting, full life-cycle
assessment, and performance measurements into
a pollution prevention approach to environmental
management.
4-10
-------
Addr: Marylou Barton
Department of
Environmental Management
Rachel Carson State Office Building
P.O. Box 8464
Harrisburg, PA 17105-8464
Tel: 717-787-7060
Fax: 717-787-9378
E-mail: barton .marylou@al.dep. state .pa.us
URL: http://www/dep.state.pa.us
Market-Based Audits of EMS:
Implementing ISO 14000
Those conducting the project are studying four
interrelated hypotheses concerning ISO 14000:1)
ISO 14000 will improve public knowledge and
reduce acceptability of industrial activities with
environmental impacts; 2) ISO 14000 will
improve internal management capabilities and
reduce compliance costs for companies over
other environmental management alternatives; 3)
ISO 14000 will improve risk management
practices and will lead to better relations with
insurers and a risk managers and to lower
premiums for certified companies; and 4) ISO
14000 will lead to decreased transaction costs of
regulation, both at the state and federal level. A
series of pilot studies in Wisconsin and
Pennsylvania are planned to test these
hypotheses.
Addr: Paul R. Kleindorfer
Wharton Risk Management and
Decision Processes Center
University of Pennsylvania/Wharton
School
1325 Steinberg-Dietrich Hall
3 620 Locust Walk
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6366
Tel: 215-898-5688
Fax: 215-573-2130
E-mail: kleindorfer@wharton.upenn.edu
URL: http: //opim. wharton .upenn.edu/risk/
Pennsylvania Environmental
Council
The Pennsylvania Environmental Council is a
statewide education, advocacy, and policy
nonprofit organization that is promoting
discussion of ISO 14000 in Pennsylvania through
several mechanisms, including publication of
related articles in a quarterly newsletter and
hosting discussion groups with representatives of
government, business, industry, and
environmental interests.
Addr: Joanne R. Denworth
1211 Chestnut Street, Suite 900
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Tel: 215-563-0250
Fax: 215-563-0528
E-mail: pecphila@libertynet.org
URL: http://www.libertynet.org/~pecphila
TENNESSEE
Department of Environment
and Conservation (TDEC)
TDEC is following the development of the ISO
14000 standards and potential uses. In addition,
TDEC is participating, as an Environmental
Council of States (ECOS) representative, in
EPA's ISO 14000/EMS Task Group.
Addr: David L. Harbin, Assistant General
Counsel
Department of Environment and
Conservation
Office of General Counsel
L & C Tower, 20th Floor
401 Church Street
Nashville, TN 37243-1548
Tel: 615-532-0144
Fax: 615-532-0145
E-mail: dharbin@mail.state .tn.us
TEXAS
4-11
-------
Office of Pollution Prevention
and Recycling
The Office currently oversees multiple projects
analyzing EMS and its application. These
projects include analyzing potential inspection
protocols to incorporate EMS, analyzing the
relationship between EMS and environmental
economic performance in industrial facilities, and
incorporating EMS into voluntary
recognition/incentive programs.
Addr: Andrew Neblett, Director
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Recycling
Texas Natural Resource Conservation
Commission
P.O. Box 13087 (MC 112)
Austin, TX 78711-3807
Tel: 512-239-3166
Fax: 512-239-3165
E-mail: aneblett(3),tnrcc.state.tx.us
UTAH
Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ)
Utah's pollution prevention program serves as the
contact point for promotion and dissemination of
information related to ISO 14000. The pollution
prevention program will notify other DEQ
divisions and industrial groups and also serve as
a contact for communicating with these groups
regarding ISO 14000.
Addr: Sonja F. Wallace
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality
168 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4810
Tel: 801-536-4477
Fax: 801-536-0061
E-mail: eqoas.swallace@state.ut.us
VERMONT
Vermont Manufacturing
Extension Center (VMEC)
VMEC is a NIST-MEP center serving the
technical assistance needs of Vermont's
manufacturers.
Addr: Muriel Durgin, Director
Vermont Manufacturing Extension
Center
P.O. Box 500
Randolph Center, VT 05061-0500
Tel: 802-728-1312; in VT 800-MEP-
4MFG
Fax: 802-728-1456
E-mail: vmec@night.vtc.vsc.edu
URL: http://www.vmec.org
VIRGINIA
Department of Environmental
Quality
Virginia is tracking and investigating ISO 14000
activities of other interested states.
Addr: T. March Bell
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
Tel: 804-698-4417
Fax: 804-698-4019
WASHINGTON
Department of Ecology
Compliance Assurance and Environmental
Audits. Several "Beyond Compliance" related
initiatives that relate to ISO 14000 exist,
including an EPA ISO 14000 task group, an
environmental leadership program, and a
performance based permits system.
Addr: Greg Sorlie, Program Manager
4-12
-------
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
Tel: 360-407-6977
Fax: 360-407-6902
E-mail: gsor461@ecy.wa.gov
Addr: John Williams, Staff
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
Tel: 360-407-6968
Fax: 360-407-6902
E-mail: jowi461@ecy.wa.gov
ISO 14000 Leadership Project. This project is
sponsored by EPA Region 10 and the
Washington State Department of Ecology,
working in conjunction with the International
Standards Initiative, to clarify the environmental,
economic, and regulatory benefits of ISO 14001
certification. The project comprises four tasks: 1)
focus group discussions, 2) discussion forum, 3)
EMS analysis, and 4) final report.
Addr: Tom Eaton, Special Assistant to the
Director for Pollution Prevention
Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 1202
Olympia, WA 98504
Tel: 360-407-6086
Fax: 360-407-6989
E-mail: teat461@ecy.wa.gov
Addr: John Palmer, Pollution Prevention
Manager
U.S. EPA Region 10
P.O. Box 1202
1200 6th Avenue (01-085)
Seattle, WA 98101
Tel: 206-553-6521
E-mail: palmer.john@epamail.epa.gov
Addr: K.C. Ayers, Executive Director
International Standards Initiative
P.O. Box 1202
Issaquah, WA 98027-1202
Tel: 206-392-7610
Fax: 206-392-7630
E-mail: kcayers@isi-standards.org
URL: http://www.isi-standards.org
WISCONSIN
Wisconsin ISO 14000
Working Group
This group is composed of members of the public
and private sector with extensive knowledge of
ISO 14000. A number of interim reports have
been developed by the group and will form the
basis for a pilot study. The pilot effort of the
Wharton/LaFollette project will be the same pilot
effort as the Wisconsin ISO 14000 Working
Group project. Companies are expected to begin
participating in 1997.
Addr: Tom Eggert
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 7921 MB/5
Madison, WI 53707
Tel: 608-267-2761
Fax: 608-267-5231
E-mail: eggert@dnr.state.wi.us
Wharton/LaFollette Joint
Research Effort
The states of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are
working together with the Wharton Business
School and the LaFollette Institute of Public
Affairs to identify cost, benefits, and public
policy issues of ISO 14000. The research will be
supplemented by a pilot study, which will test out
assumptions and theories.
Addr: JeffSmoller
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources
P.O. Box 7921 MB/5
Madison, WI 53707
Tel: 608-267-5231
Fax: 608-267-5231
4-13
-------
E-mail: smollj @dnr. state .wi. us
Addr: Paul R. Kleindorfer
Wharton Risk Management and
Decision Processes Center
University of Pennsylvania/Wharton
School
1325 Steinberg-Dietrich Hall
3 620 Locust Walk
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6366
Tel: 215-898-5830
Fax: 215-573-2130
E-mail: kleindorfer@wharton.upenn.edu
URL: http: //opim. wharton .upenn.edu/risk/
-------
5
NONPROFIT
INITIATIVES
The nonprofit organizations in this chapter are divided into three sections. An industry section
lists organizations that promote communication about ISO 14000 in their respective industry
sectors. The section on nongovernmental initiatives includes nonprofit organizations representing
stakeholders with an interest in improved environmental performance, as well as nonprofit
organizations that directly provide ISO 14000 related services. Intitiatives based at academic
institutions includes training services, consulting services and the application of the ISO 14000
standards to the academic institutions themselves.
1. Industry Associations and Networks
2. Nongovernmental Organizations
3. Academic Organizations
-------
-------
INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATIONS
Air & Waste Management
Association (AWMA)
Intercommittee Task Force on
ISO 14000
AWMA's Intercommittee Task Force on ISO
14000 will cosponsor an international forum, in
conjunction with the AWMA 1997 Annual
Conference, to be held in June 1997. The
forum, entitled AISO 14000 Environmental
Management Systems: Where we've been and
where we're going,@ will be held in Toronto,
Canada.
Addr: George D. Greenly, Jr., CCM, QEP
Battelle-Pantex
6900 1-40 West, Suite 130
Amarillo, TX79106
Tel: 806-353-4198
Fax: 806-353-4628
E-mail: ggreenly@pantex.com
URL: http://www.awma.org
American Petroleum Institute
Strategies for Today's Environmental Partner
ship (STEP). STEP represents the petroleum
industry's collective initiatives to improve
petroleum industry environmental, health, and
safety (EHS) performance, document and
communicate its achievements, and improve the
public's understanding of its performance. STEP
provides a unifying framework, through the
American Petroleum Institute (API), that the
industry can use to improve EHS performance in
a flexible, yet systematic manner; to share best
practices; to enhance operating efficiencies and
reduce costs; and to document performance
improvements.
Many companies, working collectively and
individually, have successfully used management
systems approaches to accomplish cost-effective
improvements on an ongoing basis. Individual
company and industry EHS performance and
efficiency are expected to improve as a result of
successful implementation of EHS management
systems, an expectation that several API
members with EHS management systems have
affirmed. Based on these successes, API
promotes the use of flexible EHS management
systems, which provide a means for integrating
EHS management into everyday business
operations, regardless of company size. API is
developing a template for an EHS management
system that can be used by its members as a
guide for their own systems.
Addr: Walter C. Retzsch
American Petroleum Institute
1220 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Tel: 202-682-8598
Fax: 202-682-8579
E-mail: step@api.org
URL: http://www.api.org/step/
American Society for Quality
Control (ASQC)
Energy and Environmental Division (EED).
EED produced the first American national
standard on quality assurance for environmental
programs, ANSI/ASQC E4-1994. Members are
active on several ISO Technical Committees,
including TC 176 and TC 207. EED has been an
active participant in the development of the ISO
14000 series of EMS.
Addr. John Dew, Vice-Chair
Administrative Services
Lockheed Martin Utilities Services
P.O. Box 1410
Paducah, KY 42001
Tel: 502-441-6759
5-1
-------
Fax:
E-mail:
502-441-6103
dewjr@ornl.gov
Electronic Industries
Association (EIA)
EIA has organized a variety of educational pro
grams to provide information to members
concerning strategic and practical considerations
applicable to ISO 14000. These education
programs include presentations, seminars, and
documents.
Addr. David Isaacs
Electronic Industries Association
2500 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22201-3834
Tel: 703-907-7576
Fax: 703-907-7501
E-mail: disaacs@eia.org
URL: www.eia.org
The Associated Industries of
Massachusetts/Massachusett
s Manufacturing Partnership
ISO 14000 Collaborative
The Associated Industries of Massachusetts is
working with the Massachusetts Manufacturing
Partnership to provide companies with a
comprehensive program designed to prepare for
ISO 14000 registration. The ISO 14000
Collaborative is an innovative program that
provides small manufacturers with the
opportunity to prepare for registration at an
affordable price. The program is led by world
class corporate education professionals
experienced in ISO 14000 training who follow a
proven method of interactive instruction over a
period of 12 to 14 months.
Addr: Beverly Cadorette
Massachusetts Manufacturing
Partnership
Corporation for Business, Work, and
Learning
101 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
Tel: 617-292-5100, ext. 285
Fax: 617-292-5105
E-mail: bcadorette@mmp.bssc.org
URL: http://www.mmpmfg.org
National Association of
Environmental Professionals
(NAEP)
ISO 14000 Working Group. The NAEP ISO
14000 Working Group is composed of NAEP
members from government, industry, the
financial community, and the consulting field
with an inter est in the development and
implementation of ISO 14000 standards. The
group's mission is threefold: 1) to participate in
the development and implementation of the ISO
14000 standards; 2) to promote and facilitate
communication among environmental
professionals on the impacts of these standards;
and 3) to promote the integration of NAEP
ethics, principles, interests, and practices into the
standards.
Addr: Phil Stapleton, Chair
Glover-Stapleton Associates
NAEP
1627 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: 202-331-9659
Fax: 202-296-6270
URL: http://enfo.com/NAEP
Industrial Designers Society
of America (IDSA)
Environmental Responsibility Section. IDSA's
Environmental Responsibility Section is
dedicated to the exploration of environmentally
responsible design solutions and product
management systems. The tools being explored
5-2
-------
include Life Cycle Modeling, Design for the
Environment, Integrating Design with the EMS
of ISO 14000, and other strategies that may
move society toward a sustain able future.
Addr. John Paul Kusz, IDSA
301 South Home Avenue
Park Ridge, Illinois 60068
Tel: 847-692-9590
Fax: 847-692-9590
E-mail: jpkusz@aol.com
Northeast Business
Environmental Network
(NBEN)
The Forum for Best Management Practices.
The forum will serve as a network providing
examples of best practices for pollution
prevention and compliance management.
Examples include the EPA self-policing
guidelines and ISO 14001. Participants exchange
their best practice examples based on a summary
model consisting often basic features; the best of
these examples will be summarized and
annotated in a manual to be published by NBEN
and posted to NBEN's Web page. NBEN fosters
sustainable development through the exchange of
practical information in regular meetings,
seminars, and over the Internet. Raytheon hosted
a conference discussing the forum on November
15, 1996, in Lexington, MA.
Addr: Jennifer Hill
NBEN
56 Island Street
Lawrence, MA 01842
Tel: 508-557-5475
Fax: 508-557-5493
E-mail: execdirector@nben.org
URL: http://www.nben.org.
National Center for
Manufacturing Sciences
(NCMS)
NCMS is a membership organization best de
scribed as a consortium of North American
manufacturing organizations whose main activity
is to put together and manage cooperative
research projects among its member companies.
Addr: Paul Chalmer
NCMS
3025 Boardwalk Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48108-3266
Tel: 313-995-4911
Fax: 313-995-1150
E-mail: paul.chalmer@ncms.org
URL: http://www.ncms.org
NON- GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS
Alliance for Environmental
Innovation
The Alliance for Environmental Innovation is a
project of the Environmental Defense Fund and
the Pew charitable trusts. The alliance will
develop projects that 1) implement measurable
actions to reduce waste, prevent pollution, and
conserve resources while enhancing business
performance; and 2) create actionable models and
methodologies for other businesses to adopt.
Each project will identify environmental issues,
analyze solutions in the context of functional and
economic needs, refine new methodologies for
reducing environmental impacts, and develop
implementation options.
Addr: Ralph Earle
5-3
-------
Environmental Defense Fund
6 North Market Building
Fanueil Hall Marketplace
Boston, MA 02109
Tel: 617-723-2996
Fax: 617-723-2999
E-mail: ralph@ef.org
American Institute for
Pollution Prevention (AIPP)
AIPP is an educational, not-for-profit
organization that works with trade associations
and professional societies to promote pollution
prevention within industry and throughout
society. Many of AIPP's initiatives involve
EMS. AIPP's annual meeting includes updates on
ISO 14000 and discussions regarding if and how
companies are proceeding with implementation.
Addr: Julie Fero
American Institute for Pollution
Prevention
1616 P Street NW
Suite 100
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: 202-797-6567
Fax: 202-797-6559
E-mail: cd001001@mindspring.com
URL: http://es.inel.gov/aipp/
Coalition for Environmentally
Responsible Economies
(CERES)
CERES promotes responsible corporate activity
for a safe and sustainable future for our planet.
The coalition engages environmental
organizations, the investment community, and
corporations in a dialogue about environmental
performance, both to forge a new and
meaningful dialogue with corporations about the
protection of the planet and to establish a
well-informed public that chooses where to invest
its capital based on environmental, not just
economic, performance. CERES is promoting
the creation of a widely-accepted mechanism for
corporate self-governance that will maintain
business practices consistent with the idea that
economic vitality and environmental
responsibility are compatible.
Addr. Randy Rice
CERES
711 Atlantic Avenue
Boston, MA 02111
Tel: 617-451-0927
Fax: 617-482-2028
E-mail: ceres@igc.apc.org
URL: http://www.ceres.org
Community Nutrition Institute
(CNI)
Joint Policy Dialogue on Trade and the
Environment. CNI is currently hosting a series
of facilitated policy dialogues between the
environmental and business communities in an
effort to promote consensus-based trade and
environmental policy. Dialogue participants
include the U.S. Council for International
Business, DuPont, National Association of
Manufacturing, U.S. Chamber of Commerce,
Chemical Manufacturing Association, and other
concerned business organizations.
Environmental nongovernmental organizations
include the Sierra Club, National Wildlife
Federation, World Wildlife Fund, Center for
International Environmental Law, National
Resources Defense Council, and others.
CNI's trade and environment team is currently
researching and drafting a discussion document
addressing ISO 14000 and the relevant trade and
environment issues related to this topic. The
paper will serve as a basis for a future dialogue
workshop, and copies will be made available
upon request to interested parties outside the
dialogue group
Addr.
Deborah Siefertt, Jake Caldwell, or
5-4
-------
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
David Wirth
Community Nutrition Institute
910 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
202-776-0595
202-776-0599
cnitrade@ige .ape .org
The Global Environmental
Management Initiative (GEMI)
GEMI is committed to Environmental Health and
Safety excellence throughout the business
community. GEMI's 21 member companies
represent a cross section of industry with over a
million employees and combined annual revenues
exceeding $400 billion. Established in 1990,
GEMI is a 501(c)(3) nonorganization. GEMI
produced an ISO 14001 EMS self-assessment
program in March 1996.
Addr. Tammy Marshall, Operations
Manager
1090 Vermont Avenue
NW Third Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Tel: 202-296-7449
Fax: 202-296-7442
E-mail: gemi@worldweb.net
URL: http://www.gemi.org
The Good Neighbor Project
for Sustainable Industries
This project helps to shape stakeholder
participation disclosure, input, and participation
by neighbors and workers by including these
elements in ISO 14000 environmental
management processes.
Addr. Sanford Lewis, Director
P.O. Box 79225
Waverly, MA 02179
Tel: 617-354-1030
Fax: 617-492-1635
E-mail: sanlewis@igc.apc.org
URL: http://www.envirolink.org/orgs/gnp
Green Seal Environmental
Partners Program
The program provides Agreen@ buying
assistance to businesses concerned about the
environmental impacts of their purchases.
Partners receive comprehensive, expert advice,
including lists of products recommended on the
basis of their environmental impact, product
performance, and packaging. Members include
large and small businesses, universities,
government agencies and nonprofit organizations;
participants number over 1000.
Addr: Michael Shor
Green Seal Environmental Partners
Program
1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Suite 1050
Washington, DC 20036-3101
Tel: 202-331-7337
Fax: 202-331-7533
E-mail: greenseal@aol.com
ANSI/GETFISO 14000
Integrated Solutions (IIS)
The American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) and the Global Environment &
Technology Foundation (GETF) developed this
program to serve as the primary disseminator and
facilitator of ISO 14000 information in the
United States.
IIS is composed of four services: training
(currently being done through a national network
of community colleges), ISO 14000
conferencing, publications, and an on-line
information service, IIS ON-Line. Each service
5-5
-------
promotes awareness, competence, confidence,
and skills for ISO 14000 implementation in both
public and private sectors.
Addr: Mary Clare Lynch
ANSI
11 West 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Tel: 212-642-4956
Fax: 212-598-0023
E-mail: mlynch@ansi.org
URL: http://www.ansi.org
Addr: Jacqui Keller
GETF
7010 Little River Turnpike, Suite
Annandale, VA 22302
703-750-6401
703-750-6506
http://www.isol4000.org
2\300
Tel:
Fax:
URL:
GETF
GETF is a foundation committed to facilitating
the cooperative integration of enterprise,
technology, and the environment into sustainable
systems in the United States and abroad. GETF
facilitates strategic thinking, supports
environmental policy development, builds
consensus and knowledge sharing, and
encourages partnership building and
collaboration; GETF also provides training and
education about ISO 14000 standards.
Addr. Steve Wassersug, President
GETF
7010 Little River Turnpike
Suite 300
Annandale, VA 22302
Tel: 703-750-6401
Fax: 703-750-6506
E-mail: steve .wassersug@gnet.org
URL: http://www.isol4000.org
Addr: Lynne Rasmussen, Director of Legal
Affairs, GETF
7010 Little River Turnpike, Suite 300
Annandale, VA 22302
Tel: 703-750-6401
Fax: 703-750-6506
E-mail: lynne .rasmussen@gnet.org
URL: http://www.isol4000.org
Green Mountain Institute for
Environmental Democracy
(GMIED)
GMIED provides assistance to regional, state,
and local governments; comparative risk
projects; and place-based initiatives in the
development of environmental indicators and
program measures. GMIED also serves as a
clearinghouse for environmental indicator reports
and activities and produces a bimonthly
newsletter covering environmental management.
Addr: James R. Bernard
GMIED
104 East State Street
Montpelier, VT 05602
Tel: 802-229-6077
Fax: 802-229-6076
E-mail: jbernard@gmied.org
ISO 14000 Legal Issues
Forum
The ISO 14000 Legal Issues Forum was
established by the U.S. Technical Advisory
Group in September 1995 to provide a vehicle of
discussion of legal issues arising in the
implementation of the ISO 14000 series of
standards. Under the co- chairmanship of David
J. Freeman of Battle Fowler LLP and Ira R.
Feldman of GT Strategies and Solutions, the
Forum has grown to a membership of over 200
individuals and organizations. Its members
include both governmental officials and
representatives of nonprofit groups.
5-6
-------
The forum meets bimonthly, with each meeting
devoted to addressing a specific topic of interest
to its membership. A participation fee of $75
entitles members to attend bimonthly meetings
and to receive detailed reports of the proceedings.
Addr: David Freeman
Battle Fowler LLP
75 East 55th Street
New York, NY 10022
Tel: 212-856-7126
Fax: 212-856-7820
E-mail: dfreeman@battlefowler.com
Addr. Ira Feldman
GT Strategies and Solutions
1300 Connecticut Avenue
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: 202-530-9770
Fax: 202-530-9772
E-mail: I@erols.com
Management Institute for
Environment and Business
(MEB)
Industrial Products, Inc.: Measuring
Environmental Performance (Case Study). In
1993, Industrial Products, Inc., was a highly
diversified privately-held manufacturing
company with two business objectives: increase
return on equity and decrease environmental
impact. This case examines management's
efforts to design and implement a management
system for measuring the impact of its operations
on the environment. The student gains an
understanding of the system, and is asked to
evaluate its effectiveness. The industrial
products management system illuminates the ISO
14000 series standards. A teaching note is
available.
Addr. Rebekah Paulson
Management Institute for Environment
and Business
1709 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: 202-434-1980
Fax: 202-737-1510
E-mail: briann@wri.org
URL: http://www.wri.org/wri/meb
ISO 14000 Workgroup for the
National P2 Roundtable
The first official meeting of this group was held
in November 1996 as part of the National
Pollution Prevention (P2) Roundtable's regular
workgroup meetings. Some example issues
addressed were: How can P2 mesh with the
standard? Will P2 be included in the auditor
training and if so, how? What is the role of
technical assistance personnel? Can small- and
medium-sized manufacturers benefit from ISO
14000 and what are some of their implementation
issues? Will the standard lead to source
reduction? This workgroup will generate and
maintain an ISO 14000 e-mail list.
Addr: Ravila Gupta
P.O. Box 29569
Raleigh, NC 27626
Tel: 919-715-6507
Fax: 919-715-6794
E-mail: ravila_gupta@owr. ehnr. state .nc .us
Addr: Krista Johnsen Leuteritz
NIST/MEP
Building 301, Room C-100
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Tel: 301-975-5104
Fax: 301-926-3787
E-mail: kristin.johnsen@nist.gov
URL: http://www.mep.nist.gov/
5-7
-------
New England Environmental
Network
Nothing To Waste Initiative (NTW). The NTW
Initiative is a pilot environmental justice and
pollution prevention program designed to provide
and link necessary economic and environmental
resources to small businesses in low income
communities of color. NTW infuses pollution
prevention tools and continuous improvement
techniques into peer lending groups of four to ten
small business owners who are participating in
the business education and loan program of
Working Capital, a nonprofit community
development finance agency. With initial funding
from EPA, the NTW pilot has functioned as a
unique collaboration between local community
development corporations (Grove Hall CDC in
Roxbury, MA, and Green Island CDC in
Worcester, MA); Working Capital, Cambridge
Environmental, Inc.; and the New England
Environmental Network at Tufts University.
Addr: Marcy Goldstein-Gelb,
Massachusetts Director, Working
Capital
New England Environmental Network
99 Bishop Allen Drive
Cambridge, MA 02139
Tel: 617-576-8620
Fax: 617-576-8623
E-mail: wcapmgelb@aol.com
Addr: Rona Julien
U.S. EPA Region 1
Tel: 617-565-9454
The Pacific Institute
The Pacific Institute for Studies in Development,
Environment and Security is an independent,
non-profit center conducting research and policy
analysis in the areas of environment, sustainable
development, and international security. The
Institute focuses on the interrelatedness of many
of the problems facing our planet and seeks
comprehensive solutions to these problems.
Addr: Peter Gleick, President
Pacific Institute
1204 Preservation Park Way
Oakland, CA 94612
E-mail: pistaff@pacinst.org
The Rainforest Alliance
The Smart Wood Program. Initiated in 1989,
the program initially focused on tropical forests.
Today, Smart Wood works in all forest types
worldwide. The purpose of Smart Wood is to
provide independent, objective evaluation of
forest management practices, forest products,
timber sources, and companies, enabling the
public to identify products and practices that do
not destroy forests. Through certification and use
of the Smart Wood label the program provides a
commercial incentive for forest managers to
adopt sustainable forestry practices. Smart Wood
certifies forest products that come from
Asustainable@ or Awell managed@ forests
(Asources@); Smart Wood also certifies
companies that process, manufacture, or sell
products made from certified wood, through
Achain of custody@ certification.
Addr. Richard Donovan, Director
65 Bleecker Street
New York, NY 10012-2420
Tel: 212-677-1900
Fax: 212-677-2187
E-mail: smartwood@ra.org
URL: http://www.rainforest-alliance .org
The Sierra Club
The Sierra Club is tracking the application of
ISO 14000 to ensure that it is applied in a
manner that will result in increased
environmental protection and it reflects accurate
information about how ISO 14000-rated firms
5-8
-------
are promoting a high standard of environmental
performance.
Addr. Dan Seligman, Trade and
Environment Director
Sierra Club
408 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20016
Tel: 202-675-2387
Fax: 202-547-6009
E-mail: dan. seligman@sierraclub .org
URL: http://www.sierraclub.org
Addr: Jerry Speir, Director
Tulane Institute for Environmental
Law and Policy
Tulane Law School
New Orleans, LA 70118-5670
Tel: 504-862-8829
Fax: 504-862-8857
E-mail: jspeir@law.tulane.edu
Addr: John Audley
2247 Laeb
Political Science Department
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
Tel: 317-494-7599
E-mail: audley@polsci.purdue.edu
ACADEMIC
Brown University
Brown Is Green (BIG) Program. BIG is an
environmental education and advocacy program
established to involve undergraduates in the
research and analysis of environmental problems
related to university operations and provide a
model for active learning that can be replicated
nationally. The students involved in this program
develop skills in incorporating environmentally
benign technology and methods into daily
operations. They also devise and test methods
for educating individuals within an organization
on the environmental effects of their behavior.
Addr: Kurt Teichert, Environmental
Coordinator
Brown University
Box 1943
Providence, RI 02912-1943
Tel: 401-863-7837
Fax: 401-863-3503
E-mail: kurt_teichert@brown.edu
URL: http://www.brown.edu/departments/
brown_is^green
Georgia Institute of
Technology, Economic
Development Institute (EDI)
EDI provides ISO 14000 information, training,
and implementation assistance through EDI's
Center for International Standards and Quality
(CISQ). Companies can enroll in a customized
implementation program that will help them
successfully prepare for ISO 14000 registration,
participate in the ISO 14000 discussion group (a
forum of business representatives who meet
periodically to share information and experiences
related to ISO 14000), and access current ISO
14000 information through CISQ's Standards
Information Service.
Addr: Donna M. Ennis
Georgia Tech/CISQ/EDI
151 6th Street, Room 143
Atlanta, GA 30332-0640
Tel: 404-894-0968
Fax: 404-894-1192
E-mail: cisq.mail@edi.gatech.edu
URL: http://www.edi.gatech.edu
Montana State University
Extension Service
5-9
-------
Montana Pollution Prevention Program. This
program provides pollution prevention technical
assistance to small businesses (automotive, wood
working, printers, hotels/motels, construction,
dry- cleaning), schools, Native American tribes,
local government, and agricultural operations.
Addr: Dr. Michael P. Vogel
Montana State University Extension
Service
109 Taylor Hall
Bozeman, MT59717
Tel: 406-994-3451
Fax: 406-994-5417
E-mail: acxmu@trex.oscs .montana.edu
URL: http://www.montana.edu/wated
University of Maryland
Environmental Finance Center (EFC). Part of
the Coastal and Environmental Policy Program at
the University of Maryland, EFC was created to
train, provide assistance, and act in an advisory
capacity to state and local governments on issues
related to environmental finance. Among other
activities, EFC advises local officials in forums
for frank discussions between local officials and
finance experts about financing difficulties
experienced by communities in meeting their
environmental demands.
Addr: Elizabeth Hickey
EFC
University of Maryland
Coastal and Environmental Policy
Program
0112 Skinner Hall
College Park, MD 20742
Tel: 301-405-6383
Fax: 301-314-9581
E-mail: hickey@umbi.umd.edu
URL: http://www.mdsg.umd.edu: 80/mdsg/
envifin/index.html
Salt Lake Community College
The Environmental Training Center. The
Environmental Training Center provides
noncredit workshops in environmental health and
safety subjects. This includes 1- and 2-day
workshops on the ISO 14000 standard.
Addr: Neal K. Ostler, Center Coordinator
Millcreek Center
1521 East 3900 South
Salt Lake City, UT 84124
Tel: 801-957-4942
Fax: 801-957-3848
E-mail: ostlerne@slcc.edu
URL: http://www.slcc.edu/cce/hazwop.htm
SUNY Buffalo
The Science and Engineering Library at SUNY
Buffalo, in conjunction with other university
libraries, is compiling a list of print and
electronic resources related to the topic of
Environment and Business, including resources
for ISO 14000, Clean Products and Design, and
Life Cycle Assessment. The resources are
maintained on the Science and Engineering
Library Web site under Internet Resources by
Subject: Environment. Other fee-based
information services are also available from the
Science and Engineering Library upon inquiry.
Addr: Frederick W. Stoss, M.S., M.L.S.,
Associate Librarian
Science and Engineering Library
Capen Hall, Room 228-B
SUNY Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260-2200
Tel: 716-645-2946 ext. 224
Fax: 716-645-3710
E-mail: fstoss@acsu.buffalo.edu
URL: http://wings.buffalo.edu/
libraries/units/sel/
Tulane Institute for
Environmental Law and Policy
5-10
-------
ISO 14000 From a Public Interest Perspective.
This initiative attempts to assess and respond to
developments in ISO 14000 implementation from
a nongovernmental and nonindustry perspective.
Addr. Jerry Speir, Director
Tulane Institute for Environmental
Law and Policy
Tulane Law School
New Orleans, LA 70118-5670
Tel: 504-862-8829
Fax: 504-862-8857
E-mail: jspeir@law.tulane.edu
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Economic Development Administration
University Center (EDA-UC). The University of
Wisconsin-Stout's EDA-UC provides service and
assistance in management system education,
training, and outreach to regional businesses and
industry on the implementation and operation of
systems based on international standards.
Addr: Dr. Wallace Carlson, Professor
Industrial Management
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Menomonie, WI 54751
Tel: 715-232-5162
Fax: 715-232-1105
E-mail: carlsonw@uwstout.edu
Addr. Nancy Jennejohn,
EDA-UC Program Manager
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Menomonie, WI 54751
Tel: 715-232-5023
Fax: 715-232-1985
E-mail: jennejohn@uwstout.edu
Vanderbilt Center for
Environmental Management
Studies (VCEMS)
VCEMS was formed to promote and develop
partnerships between industry, government, and
academia to explore new environmental
management practices and opportunities.
VCEMS' most recent initiatives include
incorporation of ISO 14000 principles into the
established environmental management
framework and to remove the Agreen wall@
barriers to sound environmental management
programs.
Addr. Paige Macdonald, Program Director
VCEMS, Vanderbilt University
1207 18th Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37212
Tel: 615-322-8004
Fax: 615-343-7408
E-mail: macdonald@uansv5 .vanderbilt.edu
URL: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/vcems
5-11
-------
-------
5-13
-------
6
INTERNATIONAL
INITIATIVES
The international listings in this chapter include multilateral organizations with initiatives that
extend across national boundaries and a sampling of national initiatives based in other countries
that may be useful both as information resources as well as models for programs in the United
States.
1. Multilateral Organizations
2. Alphabetical Listings by Country
-------
-------
MULTILATERAL
ORGANIZATIONS
Environmental Management
Secretariat for Latin America
and the Caribbean (LAC)
The purpose of the Environmental Management
Secretariat in the LAC region is to facilitate the
improvement of environmental management
through the application of three interrelated
instruments: research, horizontal cooperation,
and information systems (largely Internet based)
to support decisions by those engaged in policy
formulation and implementation and in activities
based on services or raw materials derived from
renewable resources.
The secretariat is also developing a focused
research program through competitive small
research grants to address the key environmental
management issues of the region.
Addr: Alexis Ferrand
Environmental Management
Secretariat
c/o CIID/IDRC
Casilla de Correo 6379
Montevideo, Uruguay
Tel: +598-2-922031/4 - 922037/44
Fax: +598-2-920223
E-mail: aferrand@idrc.ca
URL: http://www.chasque .apc.org/sema
Commission for
Environmental Cooperation
(CEC)
CEC was created to address regional
environmental concerns, help prevent potential
trade and environmental conflicts, and promote
the effective enforcement of environmental laws.
Current related activities of the CEC include a
study of North American experiences with
voluntary compliance, including ISO 14000 and
an examination of the interface between ISO
14000 and enforcement and compliance policies
and programs.
Addr: Linda F. Duncan, Head
Law & Enforcement Cooperation
Program
CEC
393 Rue St. Jacques Bureau 200
Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 1N9
Tel: 514-350-4334
Fax: 514-350-4314
E-mail: lduncan@ccemtl.org
URL: http://www.cec.org
Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and
Development (OECD)
Sustainable Product Policies and Life Cycle
Management. The objective of the project is to
monitor initiatives and policies that favor the
diffusion of life cycle approaches among
economic factors. This entails following the work
that ISO and other organizations are carrying
out, and examining implications for the transfer
of information in the marketplace (e.g., through
ecolabelling initiatives and life cycle
assessments), product performance standards,
public purchasing of environmentally preferable
goods and services, and extended producer
responsibility.
Addr: Carlo Pesso
OECD
2 Rue Andre Pascal
75775 Paris
France
Tel: +33-1-45-24-16-82
Fax: +33-1-45-24-78-76
E-mail: Carlo.PESSO@oecd.org
URL: http://www.oecd.org/env/divppc.htm
6-1
-------
United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development
(UNCTAD)
Training Program for Officials Interested in
ISO in Developing Countries. Many businesses
operating in or trading with developing countries
are not fully aware of the developments in ISO
14000. A training guide is being developed by a
United Nations (UN) agency in Geneva,
Switzerland (the UN Conference on Trade and
Development), to provide information.
Benchmark Environmental Consulting served as
the consultant for the research and writing.
Addr:
Fax:
Addr:
Dr. John Cuddy, Coordinator
Sustainable Development Program
UNCTAD
Rm. E9077
Palais des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland
+4122-907-0045
Dr. Harris Gleckman
Benchmark Environmental Consulting
470 Forest Ave, Suite 302
Portland, ME 04101
Tel: 207-775-9078
Fax: 207-772-3539
E-mail: benchmark@interramp.com
URL: www.greenchannel.com and
http://194.177.160.204:80/standards
/iso/14001/
United Nations Environmental
Program (UNEP)
UNEP Metadata Directory. The UNEP
Metadata Directory serves as a card catalogue of
environmental information. It contains card
entries (or metadata descriptions) of institutes
and datasets and allows users to search for
environmental information by institute name or
dataset (title), contact person (author), theme,
keyword, and location (subject), as well as other
criteria.
Addr: James McKenna, Program Officer
UNEP
P.O. Box 3052
Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254-2-623899
Fax: +254-2-624315
E-mail: mckennaj@unep.no
URL: http://www.grid.unep.no
United Nations Industrial
Development Organization
(UNIDO)
UNIDO is conducting several studies to make
recommendations for government policies and
strategies related to productivity, quality, and
environment in the Economic and Social
Commission for the LAC region. The studies pay
particular attention to the impact of ISO 14000
standards on industrial competitiveness and
policy recommendation.
Addr: Mr. Hessel Schuurman,
ECLAC/UNIDO
Associate Expert
P.O. Box 179-D
Santiago, Chile
Tel: +562-210-2417
Fax: +56 2-208-0252
E-mail: hschuurm@eclac.cl
US-AID
EMS Development for Industry - Electric
Power Sector. The Central Maine Power
Company and the Natsionalna Elektricheska
Kompania of Bulgaria are working on a U.S.
AID-funded effort to develop EMS for major
power plants in Bulgaria and for the central
electric utility system. Bulgaria has adopted
environmental standards similar to those of
western Europe and the United States, however,
both the plant equipment and the management
systems are dated in terms of being able to meet
these standards. This initiative will help the
management side of environmental businesses.
One major power plant was selected for system
development; at the discretion of the Natsionalna
6-2
-------
Elektricheska Kompania, the EMS techniques
will be transferred to the rest of the system.
Addr: Dr. Robert Ichord, Jr.
U.S.AID
320 21st Street NW
Washington, DC 20523
Tel: 202-647-6962
Fax: 202-647-8274
Addr: Hristo Shwabsky
Natsionalna Elektricheska Kompania
Sofia, Bulgaria
Tel: 359-2 980-1968
Fax: 359-2-875826
E-mail: nek.s.msp@mcrl .poptel.org.uk
Addr: James H. Wazlaw
Central Maine Power International
One Grandview Place
Winthrop, ME 04364
Tel: 207-626-9749
Fax: 207-626-9597
(Cross-listed with State Initiatives, chapter 4)
The United States
Environmental Training
Institute (USETI)
USETI is working in conjunction with
Environmental Pollution Control and Sanitation
Technology Company of Sao Paulo State
(CETESB) coordinating a Green Procurement
Policy project and P2/ISO 14000 courses.
Addr: Joel Riciputi
USETI
100 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW
Suite 106
Washington, DC 20007
Tel: 202-338-3400
Fax: 202-333-4782
Addr: Julia Alves
RuaMurupi, 195
Sao Paulo, Capital 05467-040
Brazil
Tel: +55-1 l-3030-6491or +55-1-3030-6490
Fax: +55-11-3030-6401
E-mail: juliaa@cetesb.br
World Bank
Informal Working Group on ISO 14000. This
group is addressing the possible implications on
environment and trade for the countries. No
documents have yet been published.
Addr: David Hanrahan
Environment Department (Room S3 069)
World Bank
1818 H Street NW
Washington, DC 20433
Tel: 202-458-5686
Fax: 202-477-0968
E-mail: dhanrahan@worldbank.org
COUNTRY INITIATIVES
Austria
EU Environmental Management and Audit
Scheme (EMAS). The objective of the scheme is
to promote continual improvements in the
environmental performance of industrial
activities by 1) establishing and implementing
environmental policies, programs, and
management systems; 2) evaluating the
performance of such elements; and 3)
establishing public information vehicles.
Addr: Johannes Mayer, Director
Dept. Information-Documentation-
Library
Federal Environment Agency
Spittelauer Laende 5, A
6-3
-------
1090 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43-1-31304-3240
Fax: +43-1-31304-5400
E-mail: mayer@uba.ubavie.gv.at
URL: http://www.ubavie.gv.at
Institute for Ecological Research in
Economics. The institute conducts research in
the field of environmental management,
ecobalances, environmental accounting,
pollution, and ecodesign.
Addr: Dr. Christine Jasch
Institut fur Okologische
Wirtschaftsforschung
Rechte Wienzeile 19/5, A-1043 Wien
Austria
Tel: +0043-1-587-21-89
Fax: +0043-1-587-09-71
E-mail: ioew@magnet.at
Bolivia
Sustainable Development Networking
Programme (SDNP). SDNP comprises a
network of institutions related to sustainable
development and environment issues through e-
mail connectivity and Internet facilities. The
institutions are from the government, private,
academic, and international cooperation sectors.
Addr: Juan Pablo Arce, National Coordinator
Sustainable Development and
Environment Ministry
RDS/UNDP
P.O. Box 12814
La Paz, Bolivia
Tel: +591-2-317320
Fax: +591-2-317320
E-mail: sdnp@coord.rds.org.bo
URL: http://coord.rds.org.bo
Canada
The Health Sciences Centre (HSC). HSC is
currently implementing an ISO 14001 Pilot
Project in a 900 bed tertiary care teaching
hospital.
HSC is participating in the Canadian Standards
Association's (CSA) Pilot Project to implement
an EMS in conformance with the draft ISO
14000 series of environmental standards. HSC
already has several components of the system in
place: 1) an environmental policy and senior
management commitment to the policy, 2) an
initial environmental review of issues, and 3) a
performance reporting process.
During the next 12 months, the complete
specifications for all processes in the EMS will
be drafted in conformance with the ISO 14001
standard.
Addr: John Reimer, P.E.
Health Sciences Centre
Environmental Protection Department
Room MH 216
59 Pearl Street
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3E3L7 Canada
Tel: 204-787-4792
Fax: 204-787-4854
E-mail: j .reimer@awnet.com
URL: http://www/hsc.mb.ca (under
construction)
Canadian Departments of Environment and
Industries' National Environmental Training
Initiative. This initiative provides training
materials and other source documents on the
implementation of ISO 14000 voluntary
environmental management standards to small
and medium sized businesses.
Addr: Dennis Landry
13th Floor
351 St. Joseph Blvd.
Hull, Quebec K1A OH3
Tel: 819-994-7977
Fax: 819-953-7970
EMS Accreditation Program. The program is
governed by guidelines contained in Standards
Council of Canada (SCC) publications entitled
"Criteria and Procedures for Accreditation of
6-4
-------
Organizations Registering Environmental
Management Systems" (CAN-P-14), "Criteria
and Procedures for Accreditation of
Environmental Auditors Certification
Organizations" (CAN-P-1412), and, in the near
future, "Criteria and Procedures for the
Accreditation of Environmental Auditor Training
Courses and Providers" (CAN-P-1413). The
SCC is a federal crown corporation and a
nonprofit organization. All components of this
program operate on a full cost-recovery basis.
An advisory committee on EMS, made up of
experts in the field, oversees the accreditation
program and provides advice to SCC on matters
pertaining to the environment. The SCC's deputy
director of standardization is currently
responsible for the day-to-day operation of the
program; the manager of conformity assessment
will assume this responsibility in the summer of
1997.
Registrars submit a written application to the
SCC for accreditation, describing their
organization and resources and including a fee as
outlined in a published fee schedule. The
environmental auditor certifiers submit a similar
application as will the environmental auditor
course providers.
Addr: Don Wilson, P.E.
45 O'Connor Street
Ottawa, ON KIP 6N7
Canada
Tel: 613-238-3222, ext. 140
Fax: 613-995-4564
E-mail: dwilson@scc.ca
URL: http://www.scc.ca
Kyrgyzstan
Ecologist Club. The club manages independent
monitoring of Human Ecology in Kyrgyzstan and
neighboring regions.
Addr: Khodjamberdiev Igor, President
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
Ecologist Club
Khodjamberdiev, P.B.1451
Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, 720040
+3312-221041
+3312-288362
igorho@nlpub.freenet.bishkek.su
Romania
Advanced Interactive Training Course on
EMS. This course applies the principles of the
British Standard 7750 (BS 7750) and the
European Eco Management and Audit Scheme
(EMAS) in Romania.
The course is delivered over 3 days with the
participants implementing the first 2 stages of an
EMS, gaining commitment and policy
formulation and performing the initial review
during the month following the course. After a
month, they participate in a 2-day workshop
where they present achievements, receive an
attendance diploma, and receive training in
management for change.
Addr: Bogdan O. Paranici
Str. Academiei 27, et. 2, Apartment 5
70108, Sector 1
Bucharest, Romania
Tel: +40-1-312-66-39 or 615-02-32
Fax: +40-1-312-42-63
E-mail: oparanici@pcnet.pcnet.ro
Spain
Program of communication and interpretation
in protected natural areas. Make available
information and general services for visits to
natural areas, services of interpretation and
guided itineraries, formation and coordination of
a volunteer program, communication to the local
population and promotion of local participation
Addr: Mariano Soriano Urban, Ph. D
Institute de Ciencias Sociales y
Ambientales
6-5
-------
Oral. Martin Carrera
Ed. Dunia II, B-A
E-30011-Murcia
Spain
Tel: +34-908-36-19-37 or +34-968-26-97-91
Fax: +34-968-26-97-91
E-mail: murban@ctv.es
URL: http://ctv.es/USERS/murban
Sweden
Chalmers University of Technology, Managing
for Environmental Opportunities. Chalmers
University of Technology offers this program
through its executive education organization,
Chalmers Advanced Management programs
(CHAMPS).
The focus is business-oriented and covers issues
like scenario-based strategy development,
transformation of the enterprise to gain
environmental competitive advantage,
development and implementation of EMS such as
ISO 14000, and the EMAS. The program brings
together a faculty of internationally renowned
lecturers, NGOs, and industry cases with a mixed
group of participants. The program is divided
into two modules that is carried through in
Sweden and the Netherlands.
Addr: Peter Lindwall
CHAMPS
Chalmers Teknikpark
S-412 88 Gothenburg
Sweden
Tel: +4631-772-43-22
Fax: +4631-772-41-71
E-mail:
peter.lindwall@champs.chalmers.se
URL: http://www.champs.chalmers.se/
Switzerland
Quality Management Systems /Environmental
Management Systems (QMS /EMS). This
project introduces EMS in accordance with ISO
14001 to companies who already are in
accordance with ISO 9000 to ensure the most
efficient changeover process. The project
commenced January 1, 1995, and is working
closely with the primary certifier for EMS
accreditation for ISO standards in Switzerland.
Addr: Reto Felix
University of St. Gall
Institute for Management of Technology
(ITEM-HSG)
Unterstrasse 22
CH-9000 St. Gall
Switzerland
Tel: +41-71-228-24-14
Fax: +41-71-228-24-20
E-mail: reto.felix@item.unisg.ch
URL: http://www.unisg.ch/~item/
PROJECT/QM/ qmsems.html
United Kingdom
Centre for Environmental Technology. The
Centre is currently running three EMS oriented
projects in the United Kingdom (UK) and the
European Union (EU): 1) a pilot project to
investigate the application of a standard
methodology to implement the EU Eco-
management and audit scheme (EMAS) in
selected SMEs across the EU, 2) a UK study into
environmental threats and opportunities facing
SMEs and their associated management
strategies, and 3) a pilot study investigating the
barriers and opportunities facing enterprises
implementing EMAS and other EMS such as the
British standard BS 7750 and ISO 14001.
Addr: Ruth Hillary
Centre for Environmental Technology
Imperial College of Science, Technology,
and Medicine
48 Prince's Gardens
London SW72PE England
Tel: +44-171-589-5111
Fax: +44-171-581-0245
E-mail: r.hillary@ic.ac.uk
6-6
-------
7
RESOURCES
This chapter presents listings of ISO 14000-related resources rather than initiatives. These
resources may be useful sources of information to organizations exploring ISO 14000, and several
categories of resources are included. Each entry only briefly describes the resource; contact
information is provided for use in obtaining more details.
The entries included in this section are not endorsed or approved in any way by EPA. All
submitted entries that were applicable for inclusion in the Directory have been listed. Because the
purpose of this Directory is to provide information on government activities concerning ISO
14000 and/or Environmental Mnagement Systems (EMS), it is beyond the scope of the Directory
to include a comprehensive listing of all the private sector organizations and initiatives also
involved in ISO 14000 and/or EMS. Every effort has been made to ensure the information in
each entry is correct.
1. U.S. national Standards
2. International Standards
3. Accreditation
4. Training
5. Clearinghouses
6. Publications
7. Internet Resources
-------
-------
U.S. NATIONAL STANDARDS
The American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
ANSI is the single, private sector certifier of U.S. national standards, and is the sole U.S. member body to
the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). ANSI does not develop standards, rather ANSI
is responsible for providing U.S. input, through Technical Advisory Groups (TAGs), to international
standards development committees in ISO. Contact: Jane Schweiker, Director Public Policy and
Government Relations, ANSI, 7315 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 250-E Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel:
301-469-3363. E-mail: jschweik@ansi.org.
Three U.S. standards organizations, which are members of ANSI, cooperate in the administration of the
U.S. TAG for ISO 14000 standards. They are:
American Society for Testing & Materials Initiatives (ASTM)
ASTM is the primary administrator for the entire U.S. TAG to ISO TC207. Kathy Morgan, ASTM, 100
Bar Harbor Dr., West Conshohocken, PA 19428. Tel: 610-832-9721. Fax: 610-832-9666. E-mail:
kmorgan@local.astm.org. URL: http://www.astm.org.
American Society for Quality Control (ASQC)
611 East Wisconsin Ave., P.O. Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201. Tel: 800-248-1946. Fax:
414-272-1734.
NSF International
NSF International is an authorized source for the ISO 14000 standards. Anita M. Cooney, NSF
International, 2100 Commonwealth Blvd., Ann Arbor MI 48105. Tel: 313-332-7333. Fax: 313-669-0196.
Information on these and other U.S. standards-setting bodies is provided through NIST (see page 3-1) or
ANSI.
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
Both the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
recognize the national standards-setting bodies that are members of ISO. Information on TC207 Member
Bodies and the countries they represent is available via the ISO home page: www.iso.org.
ACCREDITATION
ANSI-Registrar Accreditation Board (RAB)
National Accreditation Program (NAP) for ISO 14000 Environmental Management Standards.
ANSI-RAB conducts the U.S. national accreditation program that accredits registrars and training course
7-1
-------
providers. Rick James, ANSI-RAB, 7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 250-E, Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel:
301-469-3360. Fax: 301-469-3361.
TRAINING
ISO 14000 training courses are offered by a wide variety of organizations and companies within the private
sector. Various federal and state agencies, universities, and other organizations may also offer in-house
training courses. Information about these courses may be obtained by contacting them directly. Training
course information within EPA may be obtained by contacting Eric Wilkinson, Voluntary Standards
Network, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (7409), 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460. Tel:
202-260-3575. Fax: 202-260-0178. E-mail: wilkinson.eric@epamail.epa.gov.
CLEARINGHOUSES
EPA's Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse (PPIC)
PPIC disseminates information on the U.S. EPA's involvement with ISO 14000 via the Internet and EPA
and Pollution Prevention Division home pages. Susan Westerburg, US. EPA,. 401 M St., SW (MC
7407), Washington, DC 20460. Tel: 202-260-1758. Fax:202-260-4659. E-mail:
ppic@epamail.epa.gov.
World Data Center A (WDC-A) for Human Interactions in the
Environment
Data resources available include collections of international environmental agreements, integrated
assessment models of global climatic change, as well as the distributed international resources of CIESIN's
Information Cooperative. Dr. Roberta Balstad Miller, Director, CIESIN, 2250 Pierce Road, University
Center, MI 48710-0001. Tel: 517-797-2727. Fax: 517-797-2622. E-mail: ciesin.info@ ciesin.org URL:
http://www.ciesin.org
PUBLICATIONS
The ISO 14000 series of standards are copyrighted and can be obtained by contacting any of the following
organizations: ANSI, 7315 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 250-E Bethesda, MD 20814. Tel: 301-469-3363.
ASTM, 100 Bar Harbor Dr.,West Conshohocken, PA 19428. Tel: 610-832-9721. Fax: 610-832-9666.
ASQC, 611 East Wisconsin Ave., P.O. Box 3005, Milwaukee, WI 53201. Tel: 800-248-1946. Fax:
414-272-1734. NSF International, 2100 Commonwealth Blvd., Ann Arbor MI 48105. Tel:
313-332-7333. Fax:313-669-0196.
INTERNET RESOURCES
Mailing Lists
#ecdm
7-2
-------
The Environmentally Conscious Design and Manufacturing mailing list is as a forum for discussing issues
regarding designs and manufacturing processes for products (including buildings) from an environmentally
friendly viewpoint. Methods for analyzing these products are also discussed. Post messages to
ecdm@pdomain.uwindsor.ca. The listserver address is: listserv@pdomain.uwindsor.ca.
URL: http://ie.uwindsor.ca/ecdmlist/welcome.html.
#govpub
This list promotes the dissemination of local and state government information online to exchange ideas and
information related to their efforts. Both the technical and policy issues of government information on the
Internet are addressed. Post messages to: govpub@listserv.nodak.edu. The listserver address is:
listserv@listserv.nodak.edu.
#iso!4000
This unmoderated list is designed for the discussion of the ISO 14000 certification guidelines for
environmental and related industries. Post messages to isol4000@quality.org. Listserver at
maj ordomo@quality.org.
#quest
The QUEST list (Quality, Environment, Safety in Management).
Post messages to quest@listserv.nodak.edu. Listserver at listserv@listserv.nodak.edu.
#regref-l
This list (Regulatory Reform List) is a moderated discussion group that is intended to foster an
interdisciplinary discussion about the reform of regulation. No one accepted definition of regulation exists
for the purposes of this discussion group, the term "regulation" is used broadly to include the full range of
legal instruments by which governing institutions, at all levels of government, impose obligations or
constraints on private sector behavior. Post messages to regref-l@cyberus.ca. Listserver at
majordomo@cyberus.ca. URL: http://www.cyberus.ca.
#tenep
The Electronic Network of Environmental Professionals (TENEP) moderated list. Post messages to
tenep@envision.net.
ISO Websites
International Organization for Standardization
Official ISO Online site. ISO information including Your guide to ISO Online, Introduction to ISO, ISO
structure, ISO members worldwide, ISO technical committees, ISO meeting calendar, ISO Catalogue;
What's new at ISO?, and Other Web servers providing standards information. For specific questions and
comments on this WWW server: webmaster@isocs.iso.ch. For general information and questions on ISO:
CENTRAL SECRETARIAT ADDRESS 1, rue de Varembe, Case postale 56, CH-1211 Geneve 20,
Switzerland. Tel: + 41 22 749 01 11. Fax: + 41 22 733 34 30. E-mail: central@isocs.iso.ch. URL:
http://www.iso.ch.
International Organization for Standardization
7-3
-------
Additional WWW server for the ISO (as of 4/30/97, faster access than official site). ISO information
including: How to place your order for ISO Standard Publications published by ISO in Geneva, What is
ISO?, Technical Committees, Newly Published ISO and IEC Standards, and ISO and IEC Draft
International Standards (DIS). H. Ikeda, Computer Engineering, Electronic Systems Division, Department
of Electric and Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Chiba University, 1-33 Yayoi, Inage,
Chiba263, Japan. Tel: +81 43 290 3352. Fax: 81 43 290 3039. E-mail: ikeda@hike.te.chiba-u.ac.jp.
URL: http://133.82.181.177/ikeda/ISO/home.html.
International Organization for Standardization: Environmental Management
ISO site dealing with Environmental Management. Information on each of the subcommittees can be found
here as well. URL: http://www.iso.ch/menie/TC207.html.
U.S. Federal & State Government Websites
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) ISO 14000 information site
This site includes ISO 14000 and the Next Generation of Environmental Protection Tools, DEP Looking
for ISO 14000 Partners, Privatization of Environmental Regulation, So What is ISO 14000 Anyway?,
Going Green With Less Red Tape, ISO 14000: A Building Block for Redefining Environmental,
Sustainable Development, and Links to Others Sites With ISO 14000 Information.
E-mail: ASKDEP@al .dep.state.pa.us.
URL: http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/pollprev/ISO14000/ISO14000.HTM.
President's Council on Sustainable Development site
This site includes a message from the Executive Director, General Information, Council Report, Vice
President's Speech, Task Force Reports, and Newsletters. E-mail: pcsd@igc.apc.org. URL:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/pcsd/index.html
Enviro$en$e
Enviro$en$e is a pollution prevention and environmental compliance assistance network. Its databases offer
full-text and multisite search tools to address technical and regulatory issues with information from a wide
spectrum of government, industry, academic, and public interest sources. URL: http://es.inel.gov/.
EPA's Partners for the Environment
EPA's Partners for the Environment Web site contains links to many other initiatives including 33/50,
Common Sense Initiative (CSI), Design for the Environment, Environmental Leadership Program, EPA
Standards Network, and Project XL. E-mail: anderson.joe@epamail.epa.gov. URL:
http://www.epa.gov/partners/.
The Public Sector Continuous Improvement Site
This site offers suggested reading material, a library of documents available online, organizations of
interest, and a guide to online resources. John Hunter, Webmaster, Public Sector Continuous Improvement
Site. E-mail: asqcpsn@aol.com. URL: http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/pub/psci.
International Websites
Canadian Standards Association
7-4
-------
This site includes: Background Standards Information, News and Information, and Member and Technical
Committee Services. Canadian Standards Association, 178 Rexdale Boulevard, Etobicoke (Toronto),
Ontario, M9W 1R3. Tel: 800-463-6726, 416-747 4000. Fax: 416-747-4149. E-mail:
webmaster@csa.ca. URL: http://www.csa.ca/toc-prog.htm.
Central European Environmental Data Request Facility (CEDAR)
This is a project of the Austrian Federal Ministry for the Environment providing information including
CEDAMSEP, Databases and Resources, CEDAR Mailing List Archives (INFOTERRA, ENVENG-L),
Environmentally Relevant Institutions, other interesting links, and CEDAR/ISEP staff. E-mail:
webmaster@cedar.univie.ac.at. URL: http://www.cedar.univie.ac.at/.
United Nations Environment Programme Geneva Executive Center (Switzerland)
This Web site is maintained by UNEP's Information Unit for Conventions (IUC) to make information from
secretariats more widely available. Many environmental resources including: Trade and the Environment
and other Web sites on environment and sustainable development. E-mail: Webmaster@unep.ch. URL:
http://www.unep.ch.
La Planete a Besoin de Nous
French and European Environmental Associations Directory. Tel: 33-01-42-63-34-62. E-mail:
adme@worldnet.fr. URL: http://www.worldnet.fr/~adme.
Manitoba Pollution Prevention
This home page has link to the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment, which in turn links to all
provincial environment department home pages. URL: http://www.gov.mb.ca/environ.
Standards Council of Canada
This site includes an article on pressures to create sector specific standards for ISO 14000.
Http://www.scc.ca/consensu/fitall2307.html
Industry Websites
IAS Environmental Management Systems (EMS) Registration Program and ISO 14000 Page
International Approval Services (IAS) is a joint venture of the American Gas Association and the Canadian
Gas Association EMS Registration Program and ISO 14000 Page that includes: ISO 14000 Introduction;
Who - What - Where - When - Why - How of the ISO and ISO 14000; The U.S. Technical Advisory
Group (TAG) and Its Role in ISO; What Is An EMS?; ISO 14001 Guidance Document; Benefits of EMS
Implementation and Registration; and EMS Assessment Pilot Project. Cleveland Office (Main), 8501 E.
Pleasant Valley Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44131. Tel: 800-247-0802/216-524-4990. Fax: 216-642-3463.
URL: http://www.gasweb.org/gasweb/ias/isol4000.htm
Nongovernmental Organization Websites
The Committee for the National Institute for the Environment (CNIE)
CNIE is a national, nonprofit organization working to improve the scientific basis for making decisions on
environmental issues through creation of a new, non-regulatory environmental science and education
agency. E-mail: cnie@access.digex.net. URL: http://www.inhs.uiuc.edu/niewww/temp.html
7-5
-------
ISO 14000 West Coast Working Group
This site has the work of several committees from the West Coast of North America as well as general ISO
14000 information. URL: http://www.wcwg.org.
University Websites
Asian Institute of Technology (AIT). This site details how to implement ISO 14000.
URL: http://www.ait.ac.th/AIT/som/as/ISO14000/index.htm.
Links
EcoNet World-Wide Web pages
This site contains links to the many environmental organizations. Information categories include EcoNet
News Of Note; EcoNet New and Featured Items; EcoNet Issue Resource Center (Web sites sorted by
category); EcoNet's Directory of Organizations; EcoNet's Environment Gopher; and a search engine for
EcoNet's Web site. There is no direct ISO 14000 information. E-mail: econet@igc.apc.org. URL:
http://www.igc.apc.org/econet.
GLOBE Resource Centre (GRC)
This site has links to Internet environmental business sites. E-mail: grcinfo@globe.apfhet.org. URL:
http://globel.apfnet.org/.
Quality Resources Online
This site provides a list of links to other Web resources (sites and mail lists) related to ISO 14000. E-mail:
help@quality.org. URL: http://www.casti.com/qc/html/isol4000.html.
ISO World
This site provides links to quality and EMS sites, and is the source of free Global Strategic Systems
Newsletters. E-mail: db700378@jnet.sumiden.co.jp. URL: http://www.omninet.
co.jp/isoworld/english/english.htm.
Centre for Economic and Social Studies for the Environment (CESSE)
Information includes activities; studies achieved and/or in progress; selected papers; training programs in
the field of environment; and a Directory of Best Environmental Directories. Universite Libre de Bruxelles
(ULB) 44, Avenue Jeanne, CP 124, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium. Tel: +32-2-650 33 77. Fax: +32-2-650
46.91. E-mail: whecq@ulb.ac.be. URL: http://www.ulb.ac.be/ceese/cesse.html.
WWW Virtual Library Environment
This site has links organized by subject and includes a List O' Lists of Environmental Resources. URL:
http://ecosys.drdr.virginia.edu/environment.html.
7-6
-------
United States Office of Solid Waste and EPA/530-SW-88-029
Environmental Protection Emergency Response OSWER Directive 9902,4
Agency . Washington DC 20460 June 1988
>EPA RCRA Corrective
Action Interim
Measures Guidance
Interim Fina
-------
EPA/530-SW-88-029
OSWER Directive 9902,4
June 1986
RCRA CORRECTIVE ACTION
INTERIM MEASURES GUIDANCE
(Interim Final)
Office of Sottd Waste
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS '. , ,,,,,.....,,.. vii
INTERIM MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY I
EXAMPLES OF INTERIM MEASURES , 4
MODEL INTERIM MEASURES LANGUAGE 5
Containers 5
Tanks 6
Surface Impoundments , 6
Landfills 8
Waste Pile , 10
Soils 10
Ground Water 11
Surface Water Release 13
Gas Migration Control ,....; 14
Particulate Emissions ,14
Other Actions 15
APPENDICES 16
APPENDIX A; Interim Measures Workplart , A *
APPENDIX'S: Interim Measures Investigation Program B -
APPENDIX G: Interim Measures Design Program C •
APPENDIX D: Interim Measures Construction Quality Assurance Plan D -
APPENDIX E: Reports E -
-------
FOREWORD
This document was issued by Gene A. Lucero, Director, Office of Waste Programs Enforcement,
and Marcia Williams, Director, Office of Solid Waste, on June 10, 1987, as the RCRA §3008(h)
Corrective Action Interim Measures Guidance (interim Final), OSWER Directive 9902.4
The Interim Measures Guidance should be used in the development, implementation and
coordination of corrective action orders (§3008(h)) and corrective action programs carried out
pursuant to a RCRA permit (§3004(u) and (v)). Its purpose is to assist the regions and states in
deciding when to require an Interim measure. In addition, it will also assist in Identifying and
communicating to the owner/operator or respondent the specific work which must be performed to
mitigate or remove the threat presented by releases. This document should be used in conjunction
with two previously transmitted corrective action guidances, the interim final Corrective Action
Plan. November 1986 and the RCRA §3008{h) Model Consent Order, February 1987.
The document is designed to provide a review of corrective actions available under §3008(h) as
well as through RCRA permits to quickly address problems while other detailed investigations or
analyses may be ongoing. Interim measures can be designed and implemented as an initial
corrective action activity in a multi-phased order or as the action in the first of a series of orders
which feed into an operating permit, post-closure permit or supplement an interim status closure
plan.
The Interim Measures guidance consists of:
1, Implementation Strategy • which lays out the thought process necessary to determine the
need for interim measures.
2. Interim Measures List • which provides examples of interim measures compiled from past
removal actions and Superfund remedial guidance,
3, Model Language - which provides specific language as needed for each interim measure that
should be modified to address site-specific conditions.
4. Interim Measures Appendices - which lay out the scope of work for the investigation, design
and implementation of the interim measures.
Regions should consider the magnitude of potential threat to human health and the environment
during the selection of an interim measure. The Agency's authority to require an owner/operator to
perform specified activities is directly correlated to the protection of human health and the
environment. Therefore, if the risk has yet to be determined, simple monitoring of ground water,
surface waste, soil or air may be the types of actions ordered. As more information becomes
available through initial or additional sampling and analysis, more comprehensive actions should
be contemplated either by incorporating actions into a permit, a single "phased* order or by
Issuing separate orders.
Please note that the model language provided in this document should be tailored to site-specific
technical details. This is particularly important when the Agency compels the respondent to
implement an interim measure without a submission of a plan for EPA review and approval.
Significant up-front detail should be provided in the order or the permit so that the measure
implemented by the respondent is appropriate and in accordance with EPA's requirements. In
addition, since the purpose of the interim measure is to expedittously abate or remove the threat
presented by releases, specific and stringent time frames for implementation should be
incorporated into the order or permit.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This document was prepared by Mark Gilbertson, Anna Duncan and Jacqueline Moya of the RCRA
Enforcement Division In the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement. A special thanks to Tony
Baney and Lloyd Ouercl for their management support and the Office of Solid Waste and various
regional staff for their technical review and comments,
vli
-------
INTERIM MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
-- - .-1
introduction
Regions should consider interim measures for corrective
action in orders and permits and initiate them for facilities
where response is appropriate prior to the completion of
the RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measure Study.
Implementation of interim measures should be consistent
with agency priorities and must be related to protection of
human health or the environment.
Decision Criteria
Regional staff must review the pertinent facts about the
source and nature of the release or potential threat of
release. To decide whether an interim measure is
appropriate, both technical engineering Judgment and an
evaluation of potential threat to human health or the
environment should be considered. The decision for an
interim measure can be made, based on the immediacy
and magnitude of the potential threat to human health or
environment, the nature of appropriate corrective action,
and the implications of deferring the corrective action until
the RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Study
is completed. The EPA official initiating the action should
maintain a file containing reports and internal Agency
documents used in generating or supporting the interim
measure.
Sources that may provide information on releases as weli
as environmental and health concerns include:
• inspection reports
• RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA)
• RCRA Facility Investigations (RFIs)
• RCRA Part A and Part B permit applications
* Notice of significant increase (265.93)
• Responses to RCRA §3007 information requests
» Information obtained through RCRA §3013 orders
• Notifications required by CERCLA §103 or RCRA
§3016 submittals
* Information-gathering activities conducted under
CERCLA §104
* Informants' tips or citizens' complaints corroborated
by supporting information
In considering a release and potential threat to human
health or the environment, the enforcement official/permit
writer should consider factors such as type of release, its
scope and site demographics. The following questions
may help the Regional staff in evaluating these factors,'
A. Release Characterization
1, What is the source(s)? (nature, number of drums,
size (area, depth), amount, location(s))
2. Regarding hazardous wastes or constituents at
the source(s):
a. What hazardous wastes (listed, characteristic)
and hazardous constituents are present?
b. At what concentrations?
c. What is the background level of each
hazardous waste or constituent?
3. What are the known pathways through which the
contamination is migrating or may migrate and the
extent of contamination?
a. By what media is it spreading or likely to
spread? In what direction? At what rate?
b. How far have the contaminants migrated? At
what concentrations?
c. How mobile is the constituent?
d. What are the estimated quantities and/or
volumes released?
4; What is the projected fate and transport to the
extent known?
B. Potential Human Exposure
1. What is or will be the exposure pathway(s) (e.g.,
air, fire/explosion, ground water, surface water,
contact, ingestion)?
2. W,hat are the location and demographics of
populations potentially at risk from exposure (e.g.,
residential area, schools, drinking water supply,
sole source aquifer near vital ecology or protected
natural resource)?
3. What are the potential effects of human exposure
(short- and long-term effects)?"*
This does not imply that either a risk assessment or an
endangerment assessment is necessary In part, these questions are
designed to focus on high priority releases,
"Hazardous constituent health effects data can be found in
"Chemical. Physical and Biological Properties of Compounds Present
at Hazardous Waste Sites," September 1985 The draft "Superfurvd
Exposure Assessment Manual," January 14, 1986, the draft
"Suporfund Public Health Evaluation Manual." December 18, 198S
and the RCRA §3001 data on identification and listing of hazardous
wastes are also available as references on health effects
-------
4 Has human exposure actually occurred? When
may human exposure occur?
a. What kind (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, skin
contact)?
b. Are there reports-of illness, injury, death?
c. May people be affected?
d. What are the characteristics of the exposed
population(s) (how many, infants, nursing
home residents)?
5. If response is delayed, how will the situation
change?
C. Potential Environmental Exposure and
Threats
1. What media have been and may be contaminated
(e.g., ground water, air, surface water)?
2. What are the likely short-term and long-term
threats and effects on the environment of the
released waste or constituent?
3. What natural resource and environmental effects
have occurred or are possible (terrestrial; aquatic
organisms; aquifers whether or not used for
drinking water purposes}?
4, What are the known or projected ecological
effects?
5. When is this threat likely to materialize (days,
weeks, months)?
6. What are the projected long term effects?
7. H response is delayed, how will the situation
change?
Selection of Interim Measures
Once a decision can be made that interim measures are
appropriate, then the next question is what interim
measures (generally short term and mid-term) might be
required for this particular situation. Examples of interim
measures for various unit and release types are listed in
the next chapter of this guidance document on page 4.
Integration with Long Term Corrective Action
Interim measures may be separate from the
comprehensive corrective action plan but should anticipate
integration with any longer term corrective action (e.g.,
corrective measure through an order, an operating permit,
or a post-closure permit or interim status closure
requirements). To the extent possible, interim measures
should not seriously complicate the ultimate physical
management of hazardous wastes or constituents and
should not present a substantial health or environmental
threat Interim measures may add additional costs or work
to the comprehensive corrective action. This does not
preclude implementation of an interim measure,
Developing the Interim Measure Language
A scope, of work for the implementation of the interim
measures should be laid out in the corrective action order
or permit. Depending on the immediacy of the problem
and the nature of the measure, an order may be written to
directly compel actions or may require submission of a
plan to be implemented upon EPA approval or
modification. This scope of work could be laid out in the
body of the order/permit or may be incorporated as" an
attachment to the order/permit.
Interim measures language to be included in a corrective
action order follows in the chapter entitled "Model Interim
Measures Language," on page S. Language included in
Ms guidance for various units and releases types can be
combined in either an order/permit In general, the scope
of work for interim measures to be implemented at a
facility may consist of all or some of the tasks, which have
been laid out in more detail in the model language and the
appendices of this document. Examples of how the
Appendices may.be expanded and/or tailored to specific
units are provided on pages 7,8,11,12.13 and 14.
Appendix A contains the recommended components (the
objectives, a health and safety plan and a community
relations plan) for an interim measures workplan. When
interim measures are taking place at the same time as a
RCRA Facility Investigation (RFt), the RFI workplan may
already incorporate health and safety and community
relations plans sufficient for the interim measure activities.
Additional components may need to be added to this
workplan. For example, if media investigations are
necessary, see Appendix B • Interim Measures Investi-
gation Program, for details to be added to the workplan. If
an interim measure design is necessary, see Appendix
C - Interim Measures Design Program, for details to be
added to the workplan. If a construction quality assurance
program is required, see Appendix D * Interim Measures
Construction Quality Assurance Plan, for details to be
added to the workplan. If progress, draft and final reporting
are required, see Appendix E - Reports, for details to be
added to the workplan. Language in the appendices should
be modified to take into account site-specific technical
detail.
APPENDIX A • INTERIM MEASURES WORKPLAN
1, Interim Measures Objectives
2. Health and Safety Plan
3. Community Relations Plan
APPENDIX B - INTERIM MEASURES
INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
1, Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan
2. Data Management Plan
-------
APPENDIX C - INTERIM MEASURES DESIGN
PROGRAM
t. Design Plans and Specifications
2. Operation and Maintenance Plan
3. Project Schedule
4. Final Design Documents
APPENDIX D - INTERIM MEASURES
CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
1. Construction Quality Assurance Objectives
2. Inspection Activities
3. Sampling Requirements
4. Documentation
APPENDIX E - REPORTS
1. Progress
2. Interim Measures Workplan
3. Final Design Documents
4. Draft Interim Measures Report
5. Final Interim Measures Report
-------
EXAMPLES OF INTERIM MEASURES
The following is a list of possible interim measures for
various units and release types. This list is not considered
to be all inclusive,
Containers
1. Qverpack/Redrurri
2. Construct Storage Area/Move to New Storage
Area
3. Segregation
4. Sampling and Analysis
5. Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal
6. Temporary Cover
Tanks
1. Overflow/Secondary Containment
2. Leak Detection/Repair/Partia! or Complete Re*
moval
Surface impoundments
1. Reduce Head
2. Remove Free Liquids and Highly Mobile Wastes
3, Stabilize/Repair Side Walls, Dikes or Liner(s)
4. Temporary Cover
5. Run-off/Run-ort Control (Diversion or Collection
Devices)
6. Sample and Analysis to Document the
Concentration of Constituents Left in Place When
a Surface Impoundment Handling Characteristic
Wastes is Clean Closed
7. Interim Ground-water Measures (See Ground-
water Section)
Landfills
1, Run-off/Run-on Control (Diversion or Collection
Devices)
2, Reduce Head on Liner and/or in Leachate
Collection System
3. Inspect Leachate Collection/Removal System or
French Drain
4, Repair Leachate Collection/Removal System or
French Drain
5, Temporary Cap
6. Waste Removal (See Soils Section)
7. . Interim Ground-water Measures (See Ground-
water Section)
Waste Pile
1. Run»off/Rur»-on Control (Diversion or Collection
Devices)
2. Temporary Cover
3. Waste Removal (See Soils Section)
4. Interim Ground-water Measures (See Ground-
water Section)
Soils
1. Sampling/Analysis/Disposal
2. Run-off/Run-on Control {Diversion or Collection
• Devices)
3. Temporary Cap/Cover
Ground Water
1, Delineation/Verification of Gross Contamination
2. Sampling and Analysis
3. Interceptor Trench/Sump/Subsurface Drain
4. Pump and Treat/ln-situ Treatment
5. Temporary Cap/Cover
Surface Water Release (Point and Non-point)
1. Overflow/Underflow Dams
2. Filter Fences "
3. Run-off/Run-on Control (Diversion or Collection
Devices)
4. Regrading/Revegetation
5. Sample and Analyze Surface Waters and
Sediments or Point Source Discharges
Gas Migration Control
1. Barriers/Collection/Treatment/Monitoring
Paniculate Emissions
1. Truck Wash (Decontamination Unit)
2. Revegetation
3. Application of Dust Suppressant
Other Actions
1. Fencing to Prevent Direct Contact
2. Sampling Off-site Areas
3, Alternate Water Supply to Replace Contaminated
Drinking Water
4. Temporary Relocation of Exposed Population*
5, Temporary or Permanent Injunction*
6, Suspend or Revoke Authorization to Operate
Under Interim Status *
"Model language not included In this guidance
-------
MODEL INTERIM MEASURES LANGUAGE FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION ORDERS*
CONTAINERS"
t. Overpack/Redrum
Beginning immediately, the Respondent shall overpack or
redrum each leaking, significantly corroded, damaged,
uncovered and bulged container located in (insert location]
that may teak or burst, This action shall be completed by
[insert date]. Within_ days and every _ days
thereafter until [insert date]7 the Respondent shall examine
every container located in [insert location] to detect any
leakage, significant corrosion or structural damage likely to
lead to leakage. Each such leaking, significantly corroded,
damaged uncovered or bulged container that may leak or
burst shall be overpacked or redrummed within 24 hours
of discovery. The Respondent shall within days of
detection, report to EPA any leak or inadequate container
which has been identified and the measures taken to
correct the problem.
2. Construct Storage Area/Move to New Storage
Area
Within days, the Respondent shall designate to EPA or
construct a storage area in [insert location] that meets the
standards of 40 CFR §265 (or authorized state standards
or standards consistent with draft permit conditions) and is
large enough for all containers presently in areas [insert
areas] as shq,wn in the attached map, stacked one high
with sufficient aisle space. The storage area must have an
impervious base with side containment walls. The volume
contained within the walls shall be sufficient to contain
10% of the volume of containers or the volume of the
largest container, whichever is greater. The walls must be
joined to the base and scaled to prevent any releases from
migrating between the base and walls. The Respondent
shall also submit a schedule for placing containers in the
area,
• [If construction is required, within days Respondent
shall submit to EPA for review and comment a workplan
and schedule for the construction of the storage area. The
workplan shall include:
a, [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and EJ.
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall modify the workplan in
It should ba noted that each action listed under a particular unit or
media is imtepAndeni of wehotrw unless otherwise specified.
*"Se« also "Guidance Document for cleanup of Surface Tank and
Drum Sites,- OSWER 9380 0-3. May 28. 1985.
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA's approval or modification, the Respondent
shall implement the workplan in accordance with the
schedule therein.]
Following approval of the storage area by EPA, the
Respondent shall consolidate and place containers that do
not require overpacking or redrgmming in the storage area,
by [insert date]. Respondent shall overpack or redrum
each leaking, significantly corroded, damaged, uncovered
and bulged container located in [insert location] area that
may leak or burst and place the overpacked or redrummed
containers in the storage area by [insert date},
3. Segregation
Within days, the Respondent shall segregate
hazardous waste in area [insert area] that is incompatible
with any waste or other materials stored in other containers
[or nearby piles, open tanks or surface impoundments in
the area shown in attached map]. Toward this end, within
days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan and
schedule to EPA for review and comment for the
installation of devices and movement of wastes that will
segregate incompatible waste. The workptan shall include
the design, construction and installation of dikes, berms,
walls or other devices in accordance with 40 CFR
§265.177 and movement of wastes to segregate
incompatible wastes. The plan shall include but is not
limited to:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall modify the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the aBove, the
Respondent shall implement the workplan in accordance
with the schedule therein.
4. Sampling and Analysis
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment which details procedures
for sampling and analysis of wastes in [every container or
specify container or other unit] for the following parameters
[insert parameters] or [Region develops boiler plate
sampling and analysis plan and requires Respondent to
implement it which is the preferred option where time is of
the essence or Respondent is unlikely to produce an
acceptable workplan]. This workplan shall include:
a. [insert the components from Appendices A, B and E].
-------
Within
days following *Lr*A s
comments , the Respondent shall modify the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA's approval or modification of the workplan,
the Respondent shall implement the workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein. Within days
after receipt of lab results, the Respondent shall submit a
report to EPA with alt data generated from the sampling
and analysis. The report shall include but is not limited to:
a. [insert the components from Appendix B "Data
Management Plan" and Appendix EJ.
S. Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal of
Containers
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPJTTor review and comment, for the treatment,
storage and/or disposal of containers [insert container
description and location]. Management of hazardous
waste shall be conducted on-site in accordance with the
substantive requirements of RCRA or off-site in
accordance with RCRA. The workplan shall include:
a. (insert components from Appendices A and Ej.
cays of transmission or EK"-'- ;
Within
_days, following EPA's transmission of
comments, tne Respondent shall modify the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days,
following EPA approval or modification of the above, the
Respondent shall implement the workplan in accordance
with the schedule therein.
6. Temporary Cover
Within days, the Respondent shall place a temporary
cover [specify material; e.g., synthetic material] over the
containers in the areas [insert areas] to prevent
precipitation infiltration, control water running off the
container area, prevent air emissions and isolate and
contain contaminated wastes and volatiles. Respondent
shall inspect the cover on a [specify period] basis, and
shall maintain the cover until [insert date].
TANKS*
1. Overflow/Secondary Containment
Within days, to prevent overflow, the Respondent shall
remove waste from tank [specify tank] as shown on
attached map to ensure a freeboard of at least 2 feet.
Within; days, the Respondent shall monitor on a
(specify period] basis the liquid level and maintain the 2
feet freeboard [or submit a workplan to EPA for review and
comment for the installation .of an impervious secondary
containment structure with a capacity that equals or
exceeds the volume of the tank. The workplan shall
include but is not limited to:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Respondent shall revise the workptan in accordance •.*
EPA comments. Within days following El?A approve-. ..-r
modification of the workplan, the Respondent shall imple-
ment the workplan in accordance with the schedule
therein.
2. Leak Detection/Repair/Partial or Complete
Removal
Beginning within days and on a [specify period] basis
thereafter, the Respondent shall inspect tanks [specify
tanks] as shown on the attached map, including valves,
pumps and pipes (especially joints and connectors) to
detect leaks or cracks. The Respondent shall repair leaks
and tanks that present structural failure (e.g., cracks). The
Respondent shall immediately remove the substances
from the tanks into other tanks and replace the tanks if
leaks or cracks cannot be effectively and permanently
repaired in situ. The Respondent shall initiate closure of
the emptied tanks in accordance with a RCRA Closure
Plan approved by [specify date),
SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS"
The basic objective of this section is to provide a concise
description of the necessary steps to implement interim
measures at surface impoundments. Prior to the
order/permit issuance, an initial scoping of the available
information needs to be conducted. The initial scoping
should consist of a review of the existing information
regarding the hydrogeologic conditions underlying the
surface impoundment, characteristics of the design and
construction of the surface impoundment, estimated
quantities of wastes stored and their characteristics. This
information will be used to:
» evaluate the type and magnitude of the problem
dike stability
freeboard conditions
releases to ground water, air, surface water
» identify depth of subsurface sampling program arid
select appropriate sampling methods
soil sampling
ground-water sampling
- . waste sampling
• evaluate and design the interim measure based on
site characteristics
waste characteristics
technology limitations
• verification of effectiveness of the interim measure
operation and maintenance
General language outlined below tailored to facility
specifics may be used to compel actions such as:
reduction of head, removal of wastes and minimization of
further migration of contaminants.
'See also 'Outdance Document lor Cleanup of Surface Tank and
Drum Site*,* OSWER 9380.0-3, May 28, 1985
There are scenarios where some types of interim measures may not
be appropriate. These scenarios are discussed in the "Guidance.
Document (or Cleanup of Surface Impoundment Operable Units,"
January H. 1986, OSWER 935SO-13.
-------
1. Reduce head
Within days, the Respondent shall reduce the head by
pumping in surface impoundment [specify impoundment]
as shown on the attached map, to a level of [insert level]
inches below [specify benchmark! and thereafter shall
maintain the head at or below that level so as to prevent
overtopping and dike or side wait failure. The Respondent
shall store, treat or dispose of the pumped materials on-
site in a manner that complies with substantive standards
of RGRA or shall arrange for off-site storage, treatment or
disposal in accordance with RCRA. Any discharges to
navigable waters shall comply with all relevant state and
Federal requirements.
2. Remove Free Liquids and Highly Mobile
Wastes
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
and schedule to EPA for review and comment to remove
any free liquids and pumpable materials in surface
impoundment [specify impoundment] as shown on
attached map. The workplan shall also provide for
Respondent to effectuate source control by removing,
stabilizing, treating, and/or isolating (individually or in
combination) soils/ sludges down to levels [specify levels
that would reduce contaminant migration and will protect
human health and the environment in the short term) or
[Respondent shall propose levels of cleanup and
justification for such levels]* The workplan shall include;
For Example:
a. a description of the sampling and analysis to be
conducted to determine the characteristics of the
wastes to be stabilized, treated or isolated;
i. Impoundment [specify impoundment] will be divided
into a grid system using two orthogonal control lines,
one parallel to the axis of the impoundment, the
other positioned to produce a grid of roughly equal
surface area. Control stakes shall be placed at each
of the control lines.
ii, [specify number of samples] samples shall be taken
at each quadrant defined by control lines with
spacing of not less than [specify spacing] feet and
not greater than [specify spacing] feet.
iii. Samples shall be collected using [insert instrument
to be used] and analyze for the following [insert
Appendix Vtll parameters].
b. a description of all steps to be taken to effectuate the
removal, stabilization, treatment or isolation; and
c. a description of the sampling and analysis to
determine that the removal, stabilization, treatment or
This level may not be to the extent that is ultimately necessary to
protect the human health and tho environment in the long term.
Further action may be necessary during implementation of the final
remedy after ultimate levels' of cleanup have been determined. This
approach is gantrally not appropriate I! capping or backfilling of the
residual is necessary.
isolation has been fully undertaken. [Insert additional
components from Appendices A, C' D and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within^_days,
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein. Long term
remediation shall be effectuated following completion of a
RCRA Facility Investigation and Corrective Measures
Study.
3. Stabilize/Repair Side Walls, Dikes, or Liner(s)
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
and schedule to EPA tor review and comment to stabilize
and repair and thereafter maintain the side walls and
liner(s) of surface impoundment [insert unit number] and
dike area as shown in the attached map. The workplan
shall include and be supported by an engineering analysis
that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D, E and
the "Technical Guidance Document on Construction
Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste Land Disposal
Facilities," July 1986, OSWER Directive # 9472.00-3J.
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in"
accordance with the schedule therein.
4. Temporary Cover
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA tor review and comment to place a temporary
floating cover of synthetic lining over surface
impoundment [specify impoundment], as shown on
attached map to reduce infiltration of precipitation and
control air releases. The workplan shall include the design
and construction of a cover and method of application
including proper anchoring at the edges and floats to
prevent the lining from submerging so that precipitation
falling on the impoundment area runs off and does not
pond on the cover. The workplan shall also provide tor
effective erosion control. The cover must have a
permeability no greater than [specify permeability] cnVsec,
thickness of [specify thickness} mil, and be compatible
with the chemical and physical characteristics of the waste
being covered, local climate and the other design
characteristics of the unit including any berms, dikes or
other appurtenances. The plan shall also include:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D, E and
the "Technical Guidance Document on Construction
Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste Land Disposal
Facilities," July 1986, OSWER Directive # 9473.00-3].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
-------
following EPA approval or modification, the Respondent
shall implement the revised workplan in accordance wtth
the schedule therein,
5. Run-off/Run-on Control (Diversion or
Collection Devices)
Within days, the Respondent shatt submit a workplan
for EPA review and comment for the construction and
installation of devices to control surface run-on and run-
off so that run-on and run-off do not enter or leave the
impoundment area shown on the attached map. The
workplan shall include the design of diversion and
collection devices to effect run-on/run-off control. These
devices can consist of but not limited to: dikes and berms,
ditches, diversions, waterways, bench terraces, chutes and
downpipes. Design criteria shall consider 100 year
precipitation events and floods, volume, area and flow
rates. The workplan shall include and be supported by an
engineering analysts that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and EJ.
H shall include a schedule for completion of work.
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workplan, the Respondent shaft revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the
approved workplan in accordance with the schedule
therein.
6. Sampling and Analysis of Residuals
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review, and comment to sample and analyze
surface impoundment [specify impoundment] shown on
the attached map to document, the levels of the
concentrations of hazardous constituents left in place when
surface impoundment [specify impoundment] was closed
by removal of wastes.* The workpian shall include but Is
not limited to:
For Example:
s
\
a, a grid system using two orthogonal control lines one
parallel to the axis, the other positioned to produce a
grid of roughly equal surface area, and control stakes
at each end of the control lines;
b. a minimum of [insert number] boreholes taken at each
quadrant defined by the control lines with spacing of
not less than [insert spacing] feet and not greater than
[insert spacing] feet as shown on attached map and
extended to a depth of [insert depth] feet or deeper if
visual evidence of contaminants exists at each of the
sampling locations;
•When this type of surface impoundment is closed by removal,
there may be constituents left in place Some of these constituents
may present a potential threat to human health or the environment
(eg. corrosive waste may contain heavy metals).
C. screening of cores using [insert rnethod, e.g., HNU or
OVA]; and
d. This workplan shall include the procedures and
methods to be followed for the removal and treatment,
storage or disposal of contaminated soil and
groundwater to levels [insert interim levels that would
reduce contaminant migration and will protect human
health and the environment in the short term] or
[Respondent shall propose levels of clean up and
justification for such levels based on the soil and
waste characteristics]."
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, B and
E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments on the workplan, the Respondent shall revise
the workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the
revised workplan in accordance with the schedules
therein. Within days after receipt of lab results, the
Respondent shall prepare a report to present all the
information collected during the investigation. The report
shall include but is not limited to (for each core and
sample, with sample location):
a. [insert components from. Appendix B "Data
Management Plan" and Appendix EJ.
EPA reserves the right to require further action during the
implementation of the final remedy and establish levels of
cleanup that are protective to human health and the
environment in the long term.
7. Interim Ground-water Measures
(See Ground-water Section)
LANDFILLS
1. Run-on/Run-off Control (Diversion or
Collection Devices)
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
for EPA review and comment for the construction and
installation of devices to control surface run-on and run-
off so that run-on and run-off do not enter or leave the
landfill area shown on attached map. The workplan shall
include the design of diversion and collection devices to
effect run-on/run-off control. These devices can consist
of, but not limited to: dikes and berms, ditches, diversions,
waterways, bench terraces, chutes and downpipes. Design
criteria shall consider 100 year precipitation events and
floods, volume, area and flow rates. The workplan shall
include and be supported by an engineering analysis that
includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
"Ultimate levels for the protection of human health and the
environment in the long term will be determined later In the
corrective action process.
-------
The workplan shall include a schedule for the completion
of work. Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments on the proposed workplan, the Respondent
shall revise the workplan in accordance with EPA's
comments. Within days following EPA approval or
modification of the workplan, the Respondent shall imple-
ment the revised workplan in accordance with the
schedules therein.
2. Reduce Head on Liner and/or Leachate
Collection System
Within days, the Respondent shall reduce the head on
the liner in landfill(s) [specify landfill(s)] shown on the
attached map and/or in the leachate collection system in
landfill(s) [specify landfitl(s)] to a level of [specify level]
inches as measured by [specify method] at [specify
location] and thereafter maintain the head at or below that
level. The Respondent shall treat, store or dispose of
removed leachate on-sife in a manner that complies with
substantive standards of RCRA, or shall arrange for off-
site treatment, storage or disposal in compliance with
RCRA. Any discharges to navigable waters shall comply
with all relevant state and Federal requirements.
3. Inspect Leachate Collection/Removal System
or French Drain
Within days, the Respondent shall inspect the leachate
collection system in landfill [specify landfill] shown on
attached map using indirect inspection methods including
but not limited to monitoring of flow at outlets or access
points, monitoring of leachate level, correlating leachate
quality with clogging indicators; using direct inspection
methods including but not limited to video monitoring or
photographic inspection of drainage pipes and checking
physical continuity of the pipes with sewer cleaning
equipment. The Respondent shall record all data collected
or observations made including clean areas, deposits,
obstructions, deterioration, collapse, and maintain this
record as part of the facility operating record. If the
observations or data collected demonstrate that leachate
collection system is not functioning to effectively collect
leachate, or affectively transmit it to collection points or
sumps [or does not meet the standards consistent with
draft permit conditions], the Respondent shall submit the
inspection record to EPA Within days for review. [See
#4 below].
4. Repair Leachate Collection/Removal System
or French Drain
Within days, the Respondent shall clean the leachate
collection system lines in landfill [specify landfill] as shown
on attached map using conventional sewer cleaning
techniques to eliminate siltation and accumulation of
chemical, biological and other deposits. The Respondent
shall use [option: insert specific equipment to be used,
e.g., power rodding, balling, flushing, jetting, scooter, kites,
bags, tires and poly pigs for hydraulic cleaning; and
bucket machine for mechanical cleaning]. Within days,
the Respondent shall replace sections; of the leachate
collection system that have been deteriorated and/or
crushed. In the event that the landfill experiences recurring
leachate perching and poor drainage after the system has
been cleaned, Within days, the Respondent shall drill
caissons to various depths within the fill and construct a
gravel trench all the way to the bottom of the fill along the
inside periphery of the unit to prevent leachate perching
and poor drainage. The Respondent shall pump out the
perched leachate on a [insert pumping frequency} basis to
maintain the proper operation of the leachate collection
system. The Respondent shall store, treat or dispose of
the removed leachate on-site in a manner that complies
with substantive standards of RCRA, or shall arrange for
off-site treatment, storage or disposal in compliance with
RCRA. Any discharges to navigable waters shall comply
with all relevant state and Federal requirements.
5. Temporary Cap
Within days. Respondent shall submit a workplan for
EPA review and comment to place a cap (temporary) over
the entire landfill [specify landfill] shown on attached map
to prevent precipitation infiltration including preventing
ponding, control water and wind erosion and dispersion,
and isolate and contain contaminated wastes and volatiles.
The workplan shall include the design and construction of
a cover and method of application that assures that
precipitation is channelled away from the landfill area and
assures that precipitation falling on the landfill runs of!
without ponding. The cap shall have a permeability no
greater than [specify permeability] cm/sec as measured by
[specify method] and a minimum thickness of {specify
thickness] mil or {specify thickness] inches if soil, be
compatible with the chemical and physical characteristics
of the waste being covered, local climate, hydrogeology
and other design characteristics of the unit including any
berms or other appurtenances. The workptan shall include
and be supported by an engineering analysis that includes.
?,
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D, E and
the "Technical Guidance Document on Construction
Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste Land Disposal
Facilities." July 1986, OSW6R Directive * 9472.00-3].
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workplan the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the revised
workplan in accordance with the schedule therein.
6. Waste Removal
(See Soils Section)
7. Interim Ground-water Measures
(See Ground-water Section)
-------
WASTE PILE
1. Run-on/Run-off Control (Diversion or
Collection Devices)
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workpian
for EPA review and comment for the construction and
installation of devices to control surface run-on and run-
off so that run-on and run-off do not enter or leave the
waste pile area shown on attached map. The workpian
shall include the design of diversion and collection devices
to effect fun-on/run-off control. These devices can
consist of, but not limited to: dikes and berms, ditches,
diversions, waterways, bench terraces, chutes and
downpipes. Design criteria shall consider 100 year
precipitation events and floods, volume, area and flow
rates. The workpian shall include and be supported by an
engineering analysis that includes;
a. (insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
The workpian shall include a schedule for the completion
of work. Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments on the proposed workpian, the Respondent
shall revise the workpian in accordance with EPA's
comments. Within days following EPA approval or
modification of the workpian, the Respondent shall
implement the revised workpian in accordance with the
schedules therein,
2. Temporary Cover
Within days, the Respondent shall submit for EPA
review and comment a workpian to place a cap
(temporary} over the entire waste pile [specify pile] shown
in attached map to prevent precipitation infiltration and
ponding, control water .and wind erosion and dispersion.
and isolate and contain contaminated wastes and volatiies.
The workpian shall include the design and construction of
a cover and method of application that assures that
precipitation is channelled away from the waste pile area
and assures that precipitation falling on the waste pile runs
off without ponding. The cover shall have a permeability no
greater than [specify permeability] cm/sec as measured by
[specify method] and a minimum thickness of [specify
thickness] mil, be compatible with the chemical and
physical characteristics of the waste being covered, local
climate, hydrogeology and other design characteristics of
the unit including any berms or other appurtenances. The
workpian shall include and be supported by an engineering
analysis that Includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D, E and
the "Technical Guidance Document on Construction
Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste Land Disposal
Facilities," July 1986. OSWER Directive #9472.00-3].
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workpian the Respondent shall revise the
workpian in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA .approval or modification of
the workpian, the Respondent shall implement the -revised
workpian in accordance with the schedule therein.
3. Waste Removal
(See Soils Section)
4. Interim Ground-water Measures
(See Ground-water Section)
SOH.S
The basic objective of this section is to provide a
concise description of the necessary steps to implement
interim measures when there is evidence that substantially
contaminated soil is present at the facility. The interim
measures which may apply at the facility include removal
of contaminated soil and capping to prevent the infiltration
of contaminants. Prior to the order/permit issuance, an
initial scoping needs to be conducted to compile and have
a better understanding of the information already available.
The initial scoping should consist of the identification of
the soil contaminated areas, a soil/geologic cross section,
if possible, to provide a three dimensional overview of
soils/geology and extent of soil contamination at the
facility, and hydrogeologic characteristics underlying the
facility. Evidence of past spills, illegal disposal and lack of
run-off control may help to identify contaminated areas.
This information will be used to:
» evaluate the type and magnitude of the problem
- amount of contaminated soil
» determine the scope of the sampling program and
select appropriate sampling methods
- ground-water sampling
• soil sampling
• evaluate and design the interim measure based on
- site characteristics
- waste characteristics
- technology limitations
* verification of effectiveness of the interim measure
- operation1 and maintenance
General language outlined below tailored to facility
specifics may be used to compel actions such as:
sampling and disposal of contaminated soil and prevention
of further migration by controlling run-off and run-on
and infiltration using a cap or cover.
1. Sampling/Analysis/Disposal
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workpian
for EPA review and comment for the sampling and
analysis of the soil in following areas [insert specific
areas]. Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments on the workpian, the Respondent shall revise
the workpian in accordance with EPA's comments and
following EPA approval shall implement the revised
workpian in accordance with the schedules therein, The
workpian shall include but is not limited to:
10
-------
For Example:
a. a minimum of (insert number] boreholes at locations
shown on attached map and extended to a depth of
[specify depth] feet or deeper if visual evidence of
contaminants exists at each of the sampling locations;
b. screening of cores using [insert method, e.g., HNU or
OVA]; and
c. In addition, the workplan shall include the procedures
and methods to be followed for the removal and
treatment, storage or disposal of contaminated soil to
[interim levels of cleanup that would reduce
contaminant migration and will protect human health
and the environment in the short term or Respondent
shall propose interim levels and justification included
for such levels based on the soil and waste
characteristics.]*
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, B and
E].
Within days after receipt of lab results, the Respondent
shall prepare a report for EPA review and comment to
present all the information collected during the investi-
gation. The report shall include but is not limited to;
a. [insert components from Appendix B "Data Man-
agement Plan" and Appendix E],
Long term remediation shall be effectuated following
completion of a RCRA Facility Investigation and Corrective
Measure Study.
2. Run-off/Run-on Control (Diversion or
Collection .Devices)
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
for EPA review and comment for the construction and
installation of devices to control surface run-on and run-
off so that run-on and run-off do not enter or leave the
contaminated area shown on the attached map. The
workplan shall provide for the design of diversion and
collection devices to effect run-on and run-off control.
These devices can consist of, but not limited to: dikes and
berms, ditches, diversions, waterways, bench terraces,
chutes and downpipes. The workplan shall include and be
supported by an engineering analysis that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and EJ.
It shall include a schedule for the completion of the work.
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workplan the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workpian, the Respondent shall implement the revised
workplan in accordance with the schedules therein.
3. Temporary Cap/Cover
Within days, Respondent shall submit a workplan to
EPA for review and comment to place a cap (temporary)
over the contaminated area shown on the attached map to
prevent precipitation infiltration and ponding, control water
and wind erosion and dispersion, and isolate and contain
contaminated soils and volatiles. The workplan shall
include the design and construction of a cover and method
of application that assures that precipitation is channelled
away from the contaminated area and assures that
precipitation falling on the area runs off without ponding.
The workptan shall provide for the design and construction
of a cover that assures that the cap has a permeability no
greater than [specify permeability] cm/sec as measured by
[specify method], thickness of [specify thickness] mil or
[specify thickness] inches of clay or both, a minimum
slope of [specify slope] percent. The cover shall be
compatible with the chemical and physical characteristics
of the waste being covered, local climate, hydrogeology
and other design characteristics of the unit, including any
berms or other appurtenances. The workplan shall include
and be supported by an engineering analysis that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D, E and
the "Technical Guidance Document on Construction
Quality Assurance for Hazardous Waste Land Disposal
Facilities," July 1986. OSWER Directive # 9472.00-3].
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workplan the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shatl implement the revised
workplan in accordance with the schedule therein.
GROUND WATER *
The basic objective of this section is to provide a
concise description of the necessary steps to implement
interim measures when there is evidence that gross
contamination of ground water has or is occurring at the
facility and that the contamination is spreading. The
interim measures which may apply at a facility Include
removal of the gross contamination and capping of the
contaminated area to minimize the spread of the
contamination. Prior to the order/permit issuance, an initial
scoping needs to be conducted by agency personnel to
compile and review the information already available. The
initial scoping should include a review of the physical and
chemical nature of the wastes contaminating ground water
(e.g.. solubility in water, chemical class, density) and a
review of the hydrogeologic conditions at the facility
including: the characteristics of the subsurface geology;
depth to the aquifer; aquifer connections to surface water
and/or deeper aquifers; confining layers; hydraulic
conductivity of the aquifer; and horizontal and vertical
components of groundwater flow. This information will be
used to:
•Ultimate levels for the protection of human health and the
environment in the long term will be specified later in the corrective
action process.
"See "Leochate Ptume Management," November 198S,
EPA/540/2-85/004, guidartci document lor further information.
11
-------
» evaluate the type and magnitude of the problem
amount of contaminated ground water
identify the potential pathways of contaminant
migration
rate of contaminant movement
» determine the scope of the sampling program and
select appropriate sampling methods
ground-water sampling
other direct and indirect methods (e.g., soil gas
monitoring, geophysical techniques)
» evaluate and design the interim measure based on
site characteristics
waste characteristics
technology limitations
• verification of effectiveness of the interim measure
-operation and maintenance
The general language outline below when tailored to
facility specifics may be used to compel actions such as:
delineation/ verification of gross contamination, sampling
and analysis, the installation of an interceptor
trench/sump/subsurface drain system, implementation of a
pump and treat or in-situ treatment program and the
installation of a temporary cap or cover.
1. Delineation/Verification of Gross
Contamination
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to conduct a groundwater investigation to verify the
characterization of the gross contamination beneath [insert
unit or area]. This investigation shall at a minimum provide
the following information:
a, A description of the horizontal and vertical extent of
any immiscible or dissolved contamination beneath
[insert unit or area];
b. The horizontal and vertical direction of contaminant
movement;
c. The velocity of contaminant movement;
, d. The measurement of the following parameters [insert
parameters] and the concentration of the following
Appendix VIII constituents [insert constituents];
e. An evaluation of factors influencing contaminant
movement; and
f. An extrapolation of future contaminant movement.
The workplan shall include the following components:
For Example:
a. A narrative discussion of the hydrogeologic conditions
at the facility; identification of potential contaminant
pathways;
b. Description of the ground-water monitoring system;
c. Description of the investigatory approach to be used
to delineate/verify the rate and extent of contaminant
migration;
d. Discussion of the number, location, and depth of weils
to 6e installed and information on the design and
construction of the wells; and
e. A description of the sampling and analytical program
to be used to obtain ground-water monitoring data.
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, 8
and £}. Within days following EPA's transmission
of comments, the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification
of the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the
workplan in accordance with the schedule therein.
2. Sampling and Analysis
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment which details procedures
for sampling and analysis of the ground-water monitoring
wells [insert numbers]. The workplan shall include
procedures for the:
For Example:
a. Measurement of depth to fluid surface and/or standing
water and depth to the bottom of the well;
b. Detection and sampling of light and dense phase
immiscible laye/s;
c. Evacuation of the well and withdrawal of the sample;
d. Analysis of in-situ/field measured parameters; and
e. Preservation and handling of samples.
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, B, E
and the "RCRA Ground-water Monitoring Technical
Enforcement Guidance Document," September 1986,
OSWER Directive # 9950.1].
Within days following EPA*s transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments and following EPA
approval shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein.
3, Interceptor Trench/Sump/Subsurface Drains
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment for the the installation of
[interceptor trench, sump or subsurface drains] to contain
and remove the plume and lower the ground-water table
to prevent contact of water with waste material. The
workptan shall include and be supported by an engineering
analysis that includes.
a, [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA comments. Within days following
12
-------
EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein. The Respondent
shall treat, store or dispose of contaminated ground water
pumped out the [trench sump or subsurface drain] in a
manner that complies with the substantive standards of
RCRA or shall arrange for off-site treatment, storage or
disposal in compliance with RCRA. Any discharges to
navigable water shall comply with all relevant state and
Federal requirements.
4. Pump and Treat/ln-situ Treatment
Within days, the Respondent shall submit for EPA
review and comment a workplan for the design and
installation of injection wells that will allow water within the
plume to be pumped and treated." The workplan shall
include and be supported by an engineering analysis that
includes;
For Example:
a. discussion of the technical factors of importance for
the installation of the wells including:
i) selection of the number of wetls and their location
based on the hydrogeology of the site, location of
the plume and the type and amount of contaminants
present in the ground water;
ii) well design and construction equipment and
specifications (i.e. pumps, pipes, tanks, etc,),
pumping cycles and rates, and the area of influence
for each withdrawal well;
b, proposed interim levels of cleanup and technical basis
for such levels.
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, C, D
and E].
EPA's comments. Within days following EPA approval
or modification of the workplan, the Respondent shall
impfement changes in operation necessary to collect and
contain effectively contaminated ground water including
the installation of additional wells. The Respondent shall
treat,, store or dispose of contaminated ground water
pumped put of the extraction wells or drains in a manner
that complies with the substantive standards of RCRA, or
shall arrange for off-site treatment, storage or disposal in
compliance with RCRA. Any discharge to navigable waters
shatt comply with all relevant state and Federal regulations.
S. Temporary Cap/Cover
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment, for the design and
installation of a cover system to minimize rainwater
infiltration into the waste disposal area and slow the
migration of contamination. The workplan shall include and
be supported by an engineering analysis that includes:
a. (insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the workplan, the Respondent shall revise the work-
plan in accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan
submitted pursuant to paragraph [specify paragraph] in
accordance with the schedules therein.
SURFACE WATER RELEASE
1. Overflow/Underflow Dams
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment for the installation of
[overflow or underflow] dams at [insert area}. The workplan
shall include and be supported by an engineering analysis
that includes:
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
on proposed workplan, the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the revised
workplan in accordance with the schedules therein.
Within days after the installation of the pumping
system outlined in the above paragraph and start up, the
Respondent shall submit to EPA a report showing the
effectiveness of the pumping, the area of influence, draw
down times and any changes in operation necessary to
collect or contain the contaminated ground water. If based
on the report EPA determines that the wells are insufficient
to adequately collect or contain the contaminated ground
water, additional wells shall be proposed by the
Respondent. Within days following EPA's transmission
of comments, on the report the Respondent shall provide a
workplan for an upgraded system in accordance with
•Permit may be required for surface discharge; coordination with
proper authorities ii necessary
Within _days following EPA's transmission of
commeHts, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments, Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein.
2. Filter Fences
Within days, Respondent shall install filter fences in
[insert surface water name and location] in order to
prevent further spread of contamination.
3. Run-off/Run-on Control (Diversion or
Collection Devices)
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA lor review and comment for the construction and
installation of surface-water diversion and collection
devices. These devices can consist of, but are not limited
to: dikes and berms. ditches, diversions, waterways, bench
terraces, chutes and downpipes. The workplan shall
13
-------
include and be supported by an engineering analysis that
includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E],
It shall include as-designed topographic maps and a
schedule. Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within_ days
following EPA approval or modification of the workptan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein.
4. Regrading/Revegetation
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment for the grading of the
capped area {specify area] as shown on attached map.
The grading shall be conducted to (state objectives], shall
result in run-off away from the area without ponding, no
run-on to the area and, run-off away from water courses.
The workplan shall include and be supported by an
engineering analysts that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E],
Within days following EPA's transmission of comments
on the proposed workplan, the Respondent shall revise the
workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the revised
workplan in accordance with the schedules therein.
Within days, the Respondent shall submit to EPA for
review and comment a workplan to establish a vegetative
cover to stabilize the surface of the hazardous disposal
site. The workplan wjll include and be supported by an
engineering analysis that includes:
For Example:
a, discussion of the technical factors of importance
including:
i) description of soil characteristics including grain
size, organic content, nutrient and pH levels and
water content;
ii) selection of suitable plant species;
iii) use of currently acceptable construction practices
and techniques including description of seed bed
preparation, seeding and planting;
b. tables listing materials, equipment and specifications
including types of mulching and/or chemical
stabilizers; and
c, description of normal operation, fertilization and
maintenance,
[Insert additional components from Appendices A, C, D
and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
commeTiis on the workplan, the Respondent shall revise
the workplan in accordance with EPA's comments.
Within days following EPA approval or modification of
the workplan, the Respondent shall implement the
revised workplan in accordance with the schedule
therein.
5. Sample and Analyze Surface Waters and
Sediments or Point Source Discharges
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment to sample and analyze
surface water and sediments. The plan shall include:
a, [insert components from Appendices A, B and E].
The workplan shall provide for respondent to sample and
analyze surface waters and/or sediments located at [insert
locations upstream of adjoining and downstream of areas
which have received {point source or non-point source)
discharges from areas, units of concern]. Samples shall be
analyzed for the following parameters {list Appendix VIII
parameters]. Within days following EPA's comments,
the Respondent shal! revise the workplan in accordance
with EPA's comments. Within days following EPA
approval or modification of the worfiplan, the Respondent
shall implement the revised workplan in accordance with
the schedule therein. Respondent shall provide information
on the sampling locations and the results of analysis
Within days of receipt from the laboratory.
GAS MIGRATION CONTROL
1. Barriers/Collection/TreatmenVMonitoring
Within days, Respondent shall submit a workplan for
EPA review and comment for the design and installation of
a gas migration control system to control lateral and
vertical migration of gases or vapors from the landfill
{specify landfill]. The gas control system shall at a
minimum consist of:
a, a passive perimeter gas control system; or
b. active perimeter gas control system; or
c, active interior gas collection/recovery system; or
d, a combination of the above technologies.
The workplan shall include and be supported by an
engineering analysis that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E
which have been tailored for the facility specifics),
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the worKplih, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein.
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
1. Truck Wash (Decontamination Unit)
Within^ days, the Respondent shall submit to EPA for
review and comment a workplan to develop and install
14
-------
decontamination units/procedures to provide for tne
effective cleaning of vehicles and personnel entering
contaminated areas in order to prevent further spread of
contamination. Within days following EPA's comment,
the Respondent shall revise the workplan in accordance
with EPA's comments. Within days following EPA
approval or modification of the worRplan, the Respondent
shall implement the revised workplan in accordance with
the schedule therein.
2. Revegetation
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPATor review and comment to establish a vegetative
cover to stabilize the following contaminated surfaces
[insert areas}. The workplan shall include and be
supported by an engineering analysis that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Within days, the Respondent shall revise the workplan
in accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan to
establish a vegetative cover to stabilize the contaminated
surfaces in accordance with the schedule therein.
3. Application of Dust Suppressant
Within days, the Respondent shall spray
uncontaminated water every [specify time frame] hours in
areas [insert areas! to control dust emissions. The
Respondent shall not use collected leachate, used oil or
hazardous wast'e to control dust emissions.
OTHER ACTIONS
1. Fencing to Prevent Direct Contact
Within days the Respondent shall install security
fencing [insert type of fence] of a minimum of [specify
height] feet high around the perimeter of the [insert
site/unit/work area], warning signs and other measures to
limit access to the facility.
2. Sampling Off-site Areas
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment to collect and analyze
samples from drinking water wells located within a [specify
distance! mile radius of the facility. Samples shall be
analyzed for the following parameters: [insert parameters].
The workplan shall include but not be limited to the
following:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, B and £].
In the event that said permission is not obtained, the
Respondent shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of EPA,
that the Respondent was unable to obtain necessary
permission.
3. Alternate Water Supply to Replace
Contaminated Drinking Water
Withm days, the Respondent shall provide an alternate
water supply to the [insert area name of affected
community]. The alternate water supply shall consist of,
but is not limited to:
a. purchase of water from another supply; or
b. provision of a new surface water intake(s); or
c. provision of a new ground-water well(s); or
d. provision of bottled and bulk water; or
e. provision of point-of-use wells; or
f, combination of the above as necessary.
Within days, the Respondent shall submit a workplan
to EPA for review and comment for the design and
construction of a system(s) for the treatment of
contaminated water supplies. The treatment shall consist
of, but is not limited to:
a. treatment of contaminated central water supplies; or
b. point-of-use treatment; or
c. combination of the above as necessary.
The workplan shall include and be supported by an
engineering analysis that includes:
a. [insert components from Appendices A, C, D and E].
Within days following EPA's transmission of
comments, the Respondent shall revise the workplan in
accordance with EPA's comments. Within days
following EPA approval or modification of the workplan, the
Respondent shall implement the revised workplan in
accordance with the schedule therein.
4. Temporary Relocation of Exposed Population*
5. Temporary or Permanent Injunction*
e. Suspend or Revoke Authorization to Operate
Under Interim Status*
•Oder language not included.
15
-------
APPENDIX A,
APPENDIX B.
APPENDIX C.
APPENDIX D.
INTERIM MEASURES APPENDICES
INTERIM MEASURES WORK PLAN
1. Interim Measures Objectives
2. Health and Safety Ran
3. Community Relations Plan
INTERIM MEASURES INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
1. Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan
2. Data Management Plan
INTERIM MEASURES DESIGN PROGRAM
1. Design Plans and Specifications
2. Operations and Maintenance Plan
3. Project Schedule
4, Final Design Documents
INTERIM MEASURES CONSTRUCTION QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN
1. Construction Quality Assurance Objectives
2, Inspection Activities
3. Sampling Requirements
4. Documentation
APPENDIX E. REPORTS
1. Progress
2, Interim Measures Workplan
3. Final Design Documents
4. Draft Interim Measures Report
5. Final Interim Measures Report
16
-------
APPENDIX A
INTERIM MEASURES WORKPLAN
[This appendix contains the recommended components
(the objectives, a health and safety plan and a community
relations plan) for an interim measures workplan. Whan
interim measures are taking place at the same time as a
RCRA Facility Investigation (HFI), the RFI workplan may
incorporate health and safety and community relations
plans sufficient for the interim measure activities.
Additional components may need to be added to this
workplan. For example. If media investigations are
necessary, see Appendix B - Interim Measures
Investigation Program, for details to be added to the
workplan. If an interim measure design is necessary, see
Appendix C - Interim Measures Design Program, for
details to be added to the workplan. If a construction
quality assurance program is required, see Appendix D -
Interim Measures Construction Quality Assurance Plan, for
details to be added to the workplan. If progress, draft and
final reporting are required, see Appendix E - Reports, for
details to be added to the workplan. Language in the
appendices should be modified to take Into account site-
spscifie technical detail.]
The Respondent shall prepare an Interim Measures
Workplan. The Workplan shall include the development of
several plans which shall be prepared concurrently.
A. Interim Measures Objectives
The Workplan shall specify the objectives of the interim
measures, demonstrate how the interim measures will
abate releases ^nd threatened releases, and, to the extent
possible, be consistent and integrated with any long term
solution at the facility. The Interim Measures Workplan will
include a discussion of the technical approach,
engineering design, engineering plans, schedules, budget,
and personnel. The Workplan will also include a
description of qualifications of personnel performing or
directing the interim measures, including contractor
personnel. This plan shall also document the overall
management approach to the interim measures.
B. Health and Safety Plan
The Respondent shall prepare a facility Health and Safety
Plan.
i. Major elements of the Health and Safety Plan shall
include:
a. Facility description including availability of
resources such as roads, water supply.
electricity and telephone service;
b. Describe the known hazards and evaluate the
risks associated with the incident and with each
activity conducted, including, but not limited to
on and off-site exposure to contaminants
during the implementation of interim measures
at the facility.
c. List key personnel and alternates responsible for
site safety, responses operations, and for
protection of public health;
d. Delineate work area;
e. Describe levels of protection to be worn by
personnel in work area;
f. Establish procedures to control site access;
g. Describe decontamination procedures for
personnel and equipment;
h. Establish site emergency procedures;
i. Address emergency medical care for injuries
and lexicological problems;
j. Describe requirements for an environmental
surveillance program;
k. Specify any routine and special training required
for responders; and
I. Establish procedures for protecting workers from
weather-related problems.
2. The Facility Health and Safety Plan shall be
consistent with:
a. NIOSH Occupational Safety and Health
Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site
Activities (1985);
b. EPA Order 1440.1 - Respiratory Protection,
c. EPA Order 1440.3 - Health and Safety
Requirements for Employees engaged in Field
Activities;
d: Facility Contingency Plan;
e. EPA Standard Operating Safety Guide (1984);
f. OSHA regulations particularly in 29 CFR 1910
and 1926;
g. State and local regulations; and
h. Other EPA guidance as provided.
3. The Health and Safety Plan shall be revised to
address the activities to be performed at the facility
to implement the interim measures.
C. Community Relations Plan
The Respondent shall prepare a plan, for the
dissemination of information to the public regarding interim
measure activities and results. These activities shall
include the preparation and distribution of fact sheets and
participation in public meetings.
A-1
-------
APPENDIX B
INTERIM MEASURES INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
[This appendix should be incorporated in the scope of
work and the interim measures workptan when media
sampling wilt be undertaken, i.e.. prior to source removal.
The components of this appendix are a Data Collection
Quality Assurance Plan and a Data Management Plan. This
appendix should be modified to take into account site-
specific technical detail,]
A. Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan
The Respondent shall prepare a plan to document all
monitoring procedures: sampling, field measurements
and sample analysis performed during the
investigations to characterize the source and
contamination, so as to ensure that all information,
data and resulting decisions are technically sound.
and properly documented.
1, Data Collection Strategy
The strategy section of the Data Collection Quality
Assurance Plan shall include but not be limited to
the following:
a. Description of the intended uses for the data,
ana" the necessary level of precision and
accuracy for these intended uses;
b. Description of methods and procedures to be
used to assess the precision, accuracy and
completeness of the measurement data;
c. Description of the rationale used to assure
that th§ data accurately and precisely
: represent parameter variations at a sampling
point, a process condition or an
environmental condition. Examples of factors
which shall be considered and discussed
include:
i) Environmental conditions at the time of
sampling;
ii) Number of sampling points;
lit) Representativeness of selected
analytical parameters.
2. Sampling and Field Measurements
The Sampling and Field Measurements section of
the Data Collection Quality Assurance Plan shall
discuss:
a. Selecting appropriate sampling and field
measurement locations, depths, etc.;
b. Providing a sufficient number of sampling and
field measurement sites;
c. Measuring all necessary ancillary data;
d. Determining which media are to be sampled
(e.g., ground water, air, soil, sediment, etc.);
e. Determining which parameters are to be
measured and where;
f.. Selecting the frequency of sampling and field
• measurement and length of sampling period;
g. Selecting the types of sample {e.g.,
composites vs. grabs) and number of
samples to be collected;
h. Documenting field sampling and field
measurement operations and procedures,
including:
i) Documentation of procedures for
preparation of reagents or supplies which
become an integral part of the sample
(e.g., filters, and adsorbing reagents);
ii) Procedures and forms for recording the
exact location and specific considerations
associated with sample and field
measurement data acquisition;
iii) Documentation of specific sample
preservation method;
iv) Calibration of field devices;
v) Collection of replicate samples;
vi) Submission of field-biased blanks
where appropriate;
vii) Potential interferences present at the
facility;
viii) Construction materials and techniques,
associated with monitoring wells and
piezometers;
ix) Field equipment listing and sample
containers;
»x) Sampling and field measurement order;
and
xi) Decontamination procedures.
i. Selecting appropriate sample containers;
j. Sample preservation; arwl
k. Chain-of-custody, including:
i) Standardized field tracking reporting
forms to establish sample custody in the
field prior to shipment; and
ii) Pre-prepared sample labels containing
all information necessary for effective
sample tracking.
3. Sample Analysis
The Sample Analysis section of the Data
Collection Quality Assurance Plan shall specify
the following:
B-1
-------
3. Sample Analysis
The Sample Analysis section of the Data
Collection Quality Assurance Plan shall specify
the following:
a. Chain*of-custody procedures, including:
i) Identification of a responsible party to act
as sample custodian at the laboratory
facility authorized to sign for incoming
field samples, obtain documents of
shipment, and verify the data entered
onto the sample custody records;
ii) Provision for a laboratory sample custody
log consisting of serially numbered
standard lab-tracking report sheets; and
iii) Specification of laboratory sample
custody procedures for sample handling,
storage, and dispersion for analysis.
b. Sample storage and holding times;
c. Sample preparation methods;
d. Analytical procedures, including:
i) Scope and application of the procedure;
ii) Sample matrix;
iii) Potential interferences;
iv) Precision and accuracy of the
methodology; and
v) Method detection limits.
e. Calibration procedures and frequency;
f. Data reduction, validation and reporting;
g. Internal quality control checks, laboratory
performance and systems audits and
frequency, including:
i} Method blank(s);
ii) Laboratory control sample(s);
iii) Calibration check sample(s);
iv) Replicate sample(s);
v) Matrix-spiked sample(s);
vi) "Blind" quality control sample(s);
vii) Control charts;
viii) Surrogate samples;
ix) Zero and span gases; and
x) Reagent quality control checks
[Note; A performance audit may be conducted by
U.S. EPA on the laboratories selected by the
Respondent.]
h. Preventive maintenance procedures and
schedules;
i. Corrective action (for laboratory 'problems);
and
r
j. Turnaround lime. " •
B, Data Management Plan
The. Respondent shall develop and initiate a Data
Management Plan to document and track investigation
data and results. This plan shall identify and set up
data documentation materials and procedures, project
file requirements, and project-related progress
reporting procedures and documents The plan shall
also provide the format to be used to present the raw
data and conclusions of the investigation.
1, Data Record
The data record shall include the following:
a. Unique sample or field measurement code;
b. Sampling or field measurement location and
sample or measurement type;
c. Sampling or field measurement raw data;
d. Laboratory analysis ID number;
e. Property or component measured; and
f. Result of analysis (e.g., concentration).
2. Tabular Displays
The following data shall be presented in tabular
displays:
a. Unsorted (raw) data;
b. Results for each medium, or for each
constituent monitored;
c. Data reduction for numerical analysis;
d. Sorting of data by potential stratification
factors (e.g., location, soil layer, topography);
and
e. Summary data,
3. Graphical Displays
The following data shall be presented in graphical
formats {e.g., bar graphs, line graphs, area or plan
maps, isopleth plots, cross-sectional plots or
transects, three dimensional graphs, etc.):
a. Display sampling location arid sampling grid;
b. Indicate boundaries of sampling area, and
areas where more data are required;
c. Display levels of contamination at each
sampling location;
d. Display geographical extent of contamination;
e. Display contamination levels, averages, and
maxima;
f. Illustrate changes in concentration in relation
to distance from the source, time, depth or
other parameters; and
g. Indicate features affecting intramedia
transport and show potential receptors.
B-2
-------
APPENDIX C
INTERIM MEASURES DESIGN PROGRAM
(This appendix should be incorporated in the scope of
work and the interim measures workplan when the
Respondent will be required to prepare construction plans
and specifications to implement the interim measure(s) at
the facility. The components of this appendix include:
design plans and specifications, operations and
maintenance plan, project schedule, and final design
documents. This appendix should be modified to take into
account site-specific detail,]
A. Design Plans and Specifications
The Respondent shall develop clear and
comprehensive design plans and specifications which
include but are not limited to the following:
1. Discussion of the design strategy and the design
basis, including:
a. Compliance with all applicable or relevant
environmental and public health standards;
and
b. Minimization of environmental and public
impacts.
2. Discussion of the technical factors of importance
including:
a. Use of currently accepted environmental
control measures and technology;
b. The constructability of the design; and
c, Use of currently acceptable construction
practices and techniques.
3. Description of assumptions made and detailed
justification of these assumptions;
4. Discussion of the possible sources of error and
references to possible operation and maintenance
problems;
5. Detailed drawings of the proposed design
including:
a. Qualitative flow sheets; and
b. Quantitative flow sheets.
c. Facility Layout
d. Utility Locations
6. Tables listing materials, equipment and
specifications;
7. Tables giving material balances;
8. Appendices including:
a. Sample calculations (one example presented
and explained clearly for significant or unique
design calculations);
b. Derivation of equations essential to
understanding the report; and
c. Results of laboratory or field tests.
General correlation between drawings and technical
specifications, is a basic requirement of any set of
working construction plans and specifications. Before
submitting the project specifications, the Respondent
shall coordinate and cross-check the specifications
and drawings and complete the proofing of the edited
specifications and required cross-checking of all
drawings and specifications.
B. Operation and Maintenance Plan
The Respondent shall prepare an Operation and
Maintenance Plan to cover both implementation and
long term maintenance of the interim measure. The
plan shall be composed of the following elements:
1. Equipment start-up and operator training
The Respondent shall prepare, and include in the
technical specifications governing treatment
systems, contractor requirements for providing:
appropriate service visits by experienced
personnel to supervise the installation,
adjustment, startup and operation of the treatment
systems, and training covering appropriate
operational procedures once the startup has been
successfully accomplished,
2. Description of normal operation and maintenance
(O&MJ:
a. Description of tasks for operation;
•to Description of tasks for maintenance;
c. Description of prescribed treatment or
operation conditions;
d. Schedule showing frequency of each O&M
task; and
d. Common and/or anticipated remedies.
3. Description of routine monitoring and laboratory
testing:
a. Description of monitoring tasks;
b. Description of required laboratory tests and
their interpretation;
c. Required QA/QC; and
C-1
-------
d. Schedule of monitoring frequency and date, if
appropriate, when monitoring may cease.
4. Description of equipment:
a. Equipment identification;
b. Installation of monitoring components;
c. Maintenance of site equipment; and
d. Replacement schedule for equipment and
installed components.
5. Records and reporting mechanisms required;
a. Daily operating logs;
b. Laboratory records;
c. Mechanism for reporting emergencies;
d. Personnel and maintenance records; and
e. Monthly/annual reports to Federal/State
agencies.
The Operation and Maintenance Plan shall be
submitted with the Final Design Documents.
C. Project Schedule
The Respondent shall develop a detailed Project
Schedule for construction and implementation of the
interim measure(s) which identifies timing for initiation
and completion of all critical path tasks. Respondent
shall specifically identify dates for completion of the
project and major interim milestones which are
enforceable terms of this order. A Project Schedule
shall be submjtted simultaneously with the Final
Design Documents,
D. Final Design Documents
The Final Design Documents shall consist of the Final
Design Plans and Specifications (100% complete), the
Final Draft Operation and Maintenance Plan, and
Project Schedule. The Respondent shall submit the
final documents 100% complete with reproducible
drawings and specifications. The quality of the design
documents should be such that the Respondent would
be able to include them in a bid package and invite
contractors to submit bids for the construction project.
C-2
-------
APPENDIX D
INTERIM MEASURES CONSTRUCTION QUALITY
ASSURANCE PLAN
JThis appendix should be Incorporated in the scope of
work and the interim measures workplan when the interim
measure to be implemented will require a construction
quality assurance {CQA) plan to ensure, with a reasonable
degree of certainty, that a completed interim measure(s)
meets or exceeds all design criteria, plans and
specifications. The CQA plan is a facility-specific
document which must be submitted to the Agency for
approval prior to the start of construction. At a minimum,
the CQA plan should include the following elements:
construction quality assurance objectives, inspection
activities, and documentation. This appendix should be
modified to take into account site-specific detail. Upon
EPA approval of the CQA plan, the Respondent shall
construct and implement the interim measures in
accordance with the approved design, schedule, CQA
plan, and operation and maintenance plan,]
A. Construction Quality Assurance Objectives
In the CQA plan, the Respondent shall identify and
document the objectives and framework for the
development of a construction quality assurance
program including, but not limited to the following:
responsibility and authority; personnel qualifications;
inspection activities; sampling requirements; and
documentation. The responsibility and authority of all
organizations {i.e., technical consultants, construction
firms, etc.) 'and key personnel involved in the
construction of the interim measure shall be described
fully in the CQA plan. The Respondent must identify a
CQA officer and the necessary supporting inspection
staff.
B. Inspection Activities
The observations and tests that will be used to monitor
the construction and/or installation of the components
of the interim measure(s) shall be summarized in the
CQA plan. The plan shall include the scope and
frequency of each type of inspection. Inspections shall
verify compliance with all environmental requirements
and include, but not be limited to air quality and
emissions monitoring records, waste disposal records
(e.g., RCRA transportation manifests), etc. The
inspection should also ensure compliance with ail
health and safety procedures. In addition to oversight
inspections, the Respondent shall conduct the
following activities:
1, Reconstruction inspection and meeting
The Respondent shall conduct a preconstruction
inspection and meeting to:
a. Review methods for documenting and
reporting inspection data;
, b. Review methods for distributing and storing
documents and reports;
c. Review work area security and safety
protocol;
d. Discuss any appropriate modifications of the
construction quality assurance plan to ensure
that site-specific considerations are ad-
dressed; and
e. Conduct a site walk-around to verify that the
design criteria, plans, and specifications are
understood and to review material and
equipment storage locations.
The preconstruction inspection and meeting shall
be documented by a designated person and
minutes should be transmitted to all parties.
2. Prefinal inspection
Upon preliminary project completion Respondent
shall notify EPA for the purposes of conducting a
prefinal inspection. The prefinal inspection wilt
consist of a walk-through inspection of the entire
project site. The inspection is to determine
whether the project is complete and consistent
with the contract documents and the EPA
approved interim measure. Any outstanding
construction items discovered during the
inspection will be identified and noted
Additionally, treatment equipment will be
operationally tested by the Respondent, The
Respondent will certify that the equipment has
performed to meet the purpose and intent of the
specifications. Retesting will be completed where
deficiencies are revealed. The prefinal inspection
report should outline the outstanding construction
items, actions required to resolve items,,
completion date for these items, and date for final
inspection.
3. Final inspection
Upon completion of any outstanding construction
items, the Respondent shall notify EPA for the
purposes of conducting a final inspection. The
final inspection will consist of a walk-through
inspection of the project site. The prefinal
inspection report will be used as a checklist with
the final inspection focusing on the outstanding
construction items identified in the prefinal
inspection. Confirmation shall be made that
outstanding items have been resolved.
C. Sampling Requirements
The sampling and testing activities, sample size,
sample and test locations, frequency of testing,
acceptance and rejection criteria, and plans for
D-1
-------
correcting problems should be presented in the CQA
plan.
D. Documentation
Reporting requirements for CQA activities shall be
described in the CQA plan. This plan shall include
such items as daily summary reports, inspection data
sheets, problem identification and interim measures
reports, design acceptance reports, and final
documentation. Provisions for final storage of all
records shall be presented in the CQA plan.
0-2
-------
APPENDIX E
REPORTS
[This appendix should be incorporated in the scope of
work and the interim measures workptan when the
Respondent prepares plans, specifications, and reports to
document the design, construction, operation,
maintenance, and monitoring of the interim measures. The
documentation shall include, but not be limited to the
following: progress reports, interim measures workplan,
final design documents, draft and final interim measures
report.]
A, Progress
The Respondent shall at a minimum provide the EPA
with signed, monthly progress reports containing:
1. A description and estimate of the percentage of
the interim measures completed;
2. Summaries of all findings;
3. Listing of the cntena. established before the
interim measures were initiated, for judging the
functioning of the interim measures and also
explaining any modification to these criteria:
4. Results of facility monitoring, indicating that the
interim measures will meet or exceed the
performance criteria; and
5, Explanation of the operation and maintenance
(including monitoring) to be undertaken at the
facility.
This report shall include of the inspection summary
reports, inspection data sheets, problem identification
and corrective measure reports, block evaluation
reports, photographic reporting data sheets, design
engineers' acceptance reports, deviations from design
and material specifications (with justifying
documentation) and as-built drawings.
3. Summaries of all changes made in the interim £, Final Interim Measures Report
measures during the reporting period;
4. Summaries of all contacts with representative of
the local community, public interest groups or
State government during the reporting period;
5. Summaries of at) problems or potential problems
encountered during the reporting period;
6. Actions being taken to rectify problems;
7, Changes in personnel during the reporting period;
8. Projected work for the next reporting period; and
9. Copies of daily reports, inspection reports,
laboratory/monitoring data, etc.
B. Interim Measures Workplan
The Respondent shall submit an interim Measures
Workplan as described In Appendices A, B, C, and D.
C. Final Design Documents
The Respondent shall submit the Final Design
Documents as described In Appendix C.
D. Draft Interim Measures Report
At the "completion" of the construction of the project
(except for long term operation, maintenance and
monitoring), the Respondent shall submit an Interim
Measures Implementation Report to the Agency. The
Report shall document that the project is consistent
with the design specifications, and that the interim
measures are performing adequately. The Report shall
include, but not be limited to the following element?:
1. Synopsis of the interim measures and certification
of the design and construction;
2. Explanation of any modifications to the plans and
why these were necessary for the project;
The Respondent shall finalize the Interim Measures
Workplan and the Interim Measures Implementation
Report incorporating comments received on draft
submissions.
E-1
-------
Facility Submission Summary
A summary of the information reporting requirements
contained in the Interim Measures Scope of Work is
presented below:
FACILITY SUBMISSIONS
DUE DATE*
INTERIM MEASURES WORKPLAN
-Interim Measures Objectives
-Health and Safety Plan
•Community Relations Plan
-Data Collection QA Plan
-Date Management Plan
-Construction QA Plan
Final Design Documents
•Design Plans and Specs
-O&MPlan
-Project Schedule
Draft Interim Measures Report
Final Interim Measures Report
Progress Reports
SPECIFY DATi
SPECIFY DATE
Upon completion of construction
1S days after receipt of EPA comments on Draft Interim
Measures Report
MONTHLY
'All dates are calculated from the effective date of this order unless otherwise specified.
E-2
•&U.S,GOVtRNMB4T PRINTING OFFICE; 1988/548-158/67133
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
(5102G)
EPA 542-F-96-001
April 1996
&EPA A Citizen's Guide to
Innovative Treatment
Technologies
For Contaminated Soils, Sludges, Sediments, and Debris
Technology Innovation Office
Technology Fact Sheet
What are innovative treatment
technologies?
Treatment technologies are chemical, biological, or
physical processes applied to hazardous waste or contami-
nated materials to permanently change their condition.
This Citizen's Guide focuses on treatment technologies
for soil, sludge, sediment, and debris.
Treatment technologies destroy contaminants or change
them so that they are no longer hazardous or, at least, are
less hazardous. They may reduce the amount of contami-
nated material at a site, remove the component of the
waste that makes it hazardous, or immobilize the contami-
nant within the waste.
Innovative treatment technologies are newly invented
processes that have been tested and used as treatments for
hazardous waste or other contaminated materials, but still
lack enough information about their cost and how well
they work to predict their performance under a variety of
operating conditions.
Why use an innovative technology?
Treatment of contaminated sludges and soils is a field of
technology that has developed and grown since Congress
passed the "Superfund" law for contaminated waste site
cleanup in 1980. An initial approach to eliminate a
hazardous waste from a particular location was to move it
somewhere else, or cover it with a cap. These methods
use land disposal as the solution to the problem. With an
increasing number of cleanups underway, and the passage
of amendments to the Superfund law in 1986 that stated a
preference for treatment, demand developed for alterna-
tives to land disposal that provided more permanent and
less costly solutions for dealing with contaminated
materials. Development and use of more suitable treat-
ment technologies has progressed.
As knowledge about the cleanup of contaminated sites
increases, new methods for more effective, permanent
cleanups will become available. Innovative treatment
technologies, which lack a long history of full-scale use,
do not have the extensive documentation necessary to
make them a standard choice in the engineering/scientific
community. However, many innovative technologies have
been used successfully at contaminated sites in the United
States, Canada, and Europe despite incomplete verifica-
tion of their utility. Some of the technologies were
developed in response to hazardous waste problems and
some have been adapted from other industrial uses.
Developing and perfecting treatment technologies is an
on-going process, as shown in Figure 1 on page 2. The
process begins with a concept — an idea of how to treat a
particular hazardous waste. The concept usually under-
goes a research and evaluation process to prove its
feasibility. If the concept is found to be useful, often the
next step is to undergo bench-scale testing. During bench-
scale testing, a small-scale version of the technology is
Why Use Innovative Treatment Technologies?
They offer cost-effective, long-term solutions to hazardous waste clean-up problems.
They provide alternatives to land disposal or incineration.
They are often more acceptable to surrounding communities than some established treatment technologies.
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Are Innovative Treatment Technologies
Always the Right Choice?
Although innovative treatment technologies may
be less expensive and even more effective than
established technologies, science and
engineering professionals must determine which
technology is most appropriate at a given site.
built and tested in a laboratory. During this testing, it is
considered an emerging technology. If it is successful
during bench-scale testing, it is then demonstrated at
small-scale levels at field sites. If successful at the field
demonstrations, the technology often will be used full-
scale at contaminated waste sites. As the technology is
used and evaluated at different sites, it is continuously
improved.
Only after a technology has been used at many different
types of sites and the results fully documented, is it
considered an established technology. The majority of
technologies in use today are still classified as
innovative.
What types of treatment technologies
are in use?
Established technologies such as incineration and
solidification/stabilization have been the most widely
used at Superfund sites. By 1990, however, 40 percent of
the treatment technologies used were innovative. In 1994
the figure reached almost 60 percent. Table 1 on page 3
describes some of the most frequently used innovative
treatment technologies.
How is a treatment technology selected
for a site?
Before a treatment technology can be selected for a
Superfund site, detailed information about the site
conditions and contaminants must be collected. EPA uses
this information to determine which of the possible
remedies will be capable of meeting the clean-up stan-
dards that EPA has set.
A treatability study is often conducted to assess a treat-
ment technology's potential for success. It is conducted
on contaminated material from the site, either when the
treatment technology is being considered or after selec-
tion of the remedy, in order to collect additional operation
and performance information.
There are three levels of a treatability study. The level
chosen depends on the information available about the
site and technology and the nature of information that is
needed. The quickest, least expensive treatability study is
the laboratory screening. It is done to learn more about
the characteristics of the waste to determine if it would be
treatable by a particular technology. A laboratory screen-
ing test takes a matter of days and generally costs from
$10,000 to $50,000. Successful laboratory screening may
lead to more sophisticated treatability studies.
The next level of a treatability study is the bench-scale
study which provides greater information on the perfor-
mance (and, in some cases, the cost) of a technology by
simulating the treatment process using a very small
quantity of waste. The objective of this type of test is to
determine if the technology can meet the clean-up
standards set for the site. These tests typically cost
between $50,000 and $250,000.
At the highest level, the pilot-scale treatability study is
usually conducted in the field or the laboratory and
requires installation of the treatment technology. This
study is used to provide performance, cost, and design
objectives for the treatment technology. Due to the cost of
this type of study—generally more than $250,000—it is
used almost exclusively to fine-tune the design of the
technology following other treatability studies.
What happens if a technology does not
work?
There is always a possibility that a treatment technology,
established or innovative, may not work once it is in full-
scale operation in spite of the best engineering design.
Site conditions that could not be predicted from the
smaller-scale studies are often to blame. Natural condi-
tions are far more complex than laboratory conditions.
Figure 1
Developing Treatment Technologies
Concept
•Idea
• Research
• Laboratory
Screening
Emerging
• Bench-Scale Study
Innovative
•Pilot-Scale 'Chosen for • Limited Full-
Study or Field Cleanup Scale Use
Demonstration
Established
•Common Full-Scale
Use
-2-
-------
Table 1
Descriptions of Some Innovative Treatment Technologies
Soil Vapor Extraction removes contaminant vapors from soil (without having to dig it up) through the use
of vacuum extraction wells placed in the ground. Contaminants are collected for further treatment.
Air Sparging injects air into the ground below the contaminated area, forming bubbles that rise and carry
trapped and dissolved contaminants to the surface where they are captured by a soil vapor extraction
system.
Bioremediation uses microorganisms, such as bacteria in engineered processes, to break down organic
contaminants into harmless substances.
Thermal Desorption heats soil at relatively low temperatures to vaporize contaminants with low boiling
points. Vaporized contaminants then are captured and removed for further treatment or destruction.
Soil Washing uses water or a washing solution and mechanical processes to scrub excavated soils and
remove hazardous contaminants.
Chemical Dehalogenation converts contaminants that contain halogens (chlorine and fluorine, for
example) to less toxic substances through controlled chemical reactions that remove or replace halogen
atoms.
Solvent Extraction separates hazardous organic contaminants from oily-type wastes, soils, sludges, and
sediments, reducing the volume of hazardous waste that must be treated.
In Situ Soil Flushing floods contaminated soils beneath the ground surface with a solution that flushes the
contaminants to an area where they can be extracted.
A technology may be adapted or redesigned to treat
targeted waste, despite initial failures. In some rare cases
a different technology may have to be designed and
installed. Experience with and increasing use of innova-
tive treatment technologies will lead to better and faster
ways to clean up the environment.
Where are innovative treatment
technologies being selected?
Industry is using technologies labeled as "innovative" by
EPA for containing and treating the hazardous wastes
generated during manufacturing processes. Innovative
technologies also are being used under many federal and
state clean-up programs to treat hazardous wastes that
have been improperly released on the land. For example,
innovative technologies are being selected to manage
contamination (primarily petroleum) at some leaking
underground tank sites. They also are being selected to
clean up contamination that resulted from past disposal
practices at industrial sites regulated under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, and to clean up
contamination at uncontrolled hazardous wastes sites,
known as Superfund sites. One innovative treatment
technology, soil vapor extraction, is now routinely used in
federal and state clean-up programs. As more cost and
performance data are documented, innovative treatment
technologies will be increasingly recognized for their
effectiveness.
Why is EPA encouraging the use of
innovative treatment technologies?
The Environmental Protection Agency is encouraging the
selection of innovative treatment technologies for site
remedies because they have the potential to be more cost-
effective and to provide better and more efficient
cleanups. In addition, they are often more acceptable to
surrounding communities than established treatment
technologies.
-3-
-------
EPA Supports the Use of Innovative Treatment Technologies
The mission of EPA's Technology Innovation Office (TIO) is to increase government and industry use of
innovative treatment technologies at contaminated waste sites.
Numerous other efforts to increase the use of innovative technologies are described in the EPA fact
sheet entitled Progress in Reducing Impediments to the Use of Innovative Remediation Technology.
(The document number is EPA 542-F-95-008 and can be ordered from NCEPI at the address given
below.)
For More Information
The U.S. EPA's Technology Innovation Office has produced a series of Citizen's Guides, including this one, on topics
relating to innovative treatment technologies:
• A Citizen's Guide to Soil Washing, EPA 542-F-96-002
• A Citizen's Guide to Solvent Extraction, EPA 542-F-96-003
• A Citizen's Guide to Chemical Dehalogenation, EPA 542-F-96-004
• A Citizen's Guide to Thermal Desorption, EPA 542-F-96-005
• A Citizen's Guide to In Situ Soil Flushing, EPA 542-F-96-006
• A Citizen's Guide to Bioremediation, EPA 542-F-96-007
• A Citizen's Guide to Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging, EPA 542-F-96-008
• A Citizen's Guide to Phytoremediation, EPA 542-F-96-014
• A Citizen's Guide to Natural Attenuation, EPA 542-F-96-015
- A Citizen's Guide to Treatment Walls, EPA 542-F-96-016
Some other publications of interest include:
Selected Alternative and Innovative Treatment Technologies for Corrective Action and Site Remediation: A
Bibliography of EPA Resources, EPA 542-B-95-001. A bibliography of EPA publications about innovative
treatment technologies.
• Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report (7th Ed.), EPA 542-R-95-008. A description of
sites at which innovative treatment technologies have been used or selected for use.
Innovative Treatment Technologies: Annual Status Report Database. An automated computer database of
descriptions of sites at which innovative treatment technologies have been used or selected for use. The
database can be downloaded free of charge from EPA's Cleanup Information bulletin board (CLU-IN). Call CLU-
IN at 301-589-8366 (modem). CLU-IN's help line is 301-589-8368. The database also is available for purchase
on diskettes. Contact NCEPI for details.
Copies of the items listed above are available from:
National Center for Environmental Publications and Information (NCEPI)
P.O. Box 42419
Cincinnati, OH 45242
Fax your order request to 513-489-8695 or call 513-489-8190
If these documents are out of stock, you may be directed to other sources. In this case, there may be a charge for
some of these documents.
NOTICE: This fact sheet is intended solely as general guidance and information. It is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any
party in litigation with the United States. The Agency also reserves the right to change this guidance at any time without public notice.
-4-
------- |