Proven to Focus Your Efforts Proven to Focus Your Efforts

Transcription

TM Surveys
GORE
GORETM
Surveys –Sampling
–Sampling Air,
Air, Soil,
Soil, and
and Water
Water
Proven
Proven to
to Focus
Focus Your
Your Efforts
Efforts
•Simple
•Simple
•Accurate
•Accurate
•Versatile
•Versatile
•Economical
•Economical
www.gore.com/surveys
www.gore.com/surveys
GORE and designs are trademarks of W. L. Gore & Associates
© 2007 W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.
izinnee orr”
Creativity
With
Integrity
z
”
a
g
a
F
o
ag
F
k
a oorrk
m
m
E
W
N
E
W
U
o
N
t
T
U
o
t
s
R
T
e
OOR anniies
F
F
7
ppa
2200007t Coom
m
C
s
eest
B
B
0
““11000
ee
n
i
z
a
n
i
g
z
aaga
ee
m
v
i
t
Y
a
m
v
N
i
v
t
Y
A
o
PPAN
nnova
n
M
i
t
O
n
s
M
i
C
o
t
O
AASSTT C nd,,tthheem
mos . Goorree &&
F
F
• Established in 1958for ppoouund
..LL. GMarkets
W
s
i
W
a
r
s
fo
rriicca i
e
44)•
m
0
PPoouunndd sales
e
) Fabrics
A
• $2.3 billion““
annual
0
m
2
n
0
i
A
0
c
y
2
e
n
i
n
D
c
a
(
y
..”” (De
anoffices
s
e
t
ccoom
mpp45
s
a
i
• 7,500 associates,
worldwide
e
t
• Electronics
AAssssooccia
• Dedication to R&D
• Medical
• 1,000s of innovative products
• Industrial
• >650 US Patents
GORE FABRICS: Best In Class
• Gore created the category of waterproof,
breathable comfort in outerwear
–GORE-TEX® fabrics
–WINDSTOPPER® fabrics
–SUPPRESCENT® technology
–AIRVANTAGE™ adjustable insulation
• Fabrics in top name-brand garments, gloves,
footwear for sport and citywear; military
and fire/police protection, too.
GORE MEDICAL:
In Harmony with the Body
• Gore produces biocompatible healing solutions
that work with body tissue to restore normal
function.
• Our products have become increasingly less
invasive over the last 30 years, including:
–Synthetic blood vessels
–Tissue regeneration patches & implants
–Surgical sutures
–Graphs, stents, shunts
GORE ELECTRONICS:
Signal Transmission with Integrity
• Gore technology enables signals to travel at
high speed with great fidelity & stability.
• Our expertise in polymeric dielectrics can be
found in:
–Cables & cable assemblies
–Printed wiring board materials
–Computer chip components
–Conductive interfaces
–Shielding gaskets
GORE INDUSTRIAL:
Always Innovating
• Gore delivers the best possible combination of
value and performance to solve industrial-sized
problems with innovative materials technology.
• We combine our expertise in fluoropolymers,
with strong application engineering support,
to lead developments in:
–Fuel Cell Technology
–Microcontamination Control
–Filtration & Venting
–Fluid Handling
Our Credentials
• Survey Products Group - 1992
• Consultants, geologists, chemists, & engineers
• GORETM Survey
• Recognized, proven technology –US EPA, state regulators
• All 50 US states & international
Reducing Costs by Focusing
Gasoline
Actual
ActualSite
SiteAssessment
AssessmentCase:
Case:
•33
1995 Data
•33acres
acres
••
15
15wells
wellsvs
vs33
33wells
wells
••
$80,000
$80,000saved
savedinitially
initially
••
$25,000
$25,000saved
savedquarterly
quarterly
First
Firstyear
yearROI
ROI--$155,000
$155,000
Annual
AnnualROI
ROI--$100,000
$100,000
TM
$22,000
$22,000GORE
GORETMSurvey
Survey
Diesel
Do you prefer an informative picture before an operation?
Where’s the problem?
GORETM Module
• Accurate
• Comprehensive
• Proven
• US EPA Verified
• ITRC Guidance
Universal VOC/SVOC sampler - soil, air, and water
• Delivers definition and delineation
• Informs and strengthens your Conceptual Site Model
• Saves Money
GORETM Module - Patented
GORE-TEX® Membrane
ePTFE
ePTFE--50,000
50,000xx magnification
magnification
VOCs, SVOCs
Liquid Water
®
1)
1) GORE-TEX
GORE-TEX®Membrane
Membrane
•• Chemically-inert,
Chemically-inert,waterproof,
waterproof,vapor
vaporpermeable
permeable
Vapors
pass
through
2)
2) Engineered
Engineeredsorbents
sorbents
•• Hydrophobic,
Hydrophobic,VOCs,
VOCs,SVOCs
SVOCs
3)
3) Sample
Sampleanalysis
analysis
•• Duplicate
Duplicatesamples
samples
••
••
Direct
Directdetection
detectionof
oforganic
organiccompounds
compounds
Sample
Sampleintegrity
integrityprotected
protected
Water & soil
particles
remain
outside
Adsorbents
Sample Any Media
Indoor/Outdoor Air
Subslab Vapor
Soil Gas
Sediment
Ground & Surface Water
Module Deployment - Soils
• Rapid, unobtrusive
• Hand tools
• 10- 30m spacing
• 2-10 day exposure
Why Passive Sampling?
Clays
Sands
Drier
Silts
Wetter
Deep GW
Shallow GW
Geological Universe
Soil Gas Sampling
Passive
Active
Volatile
Shorter Sampling
Semivolatile
Longer Sampling
Organic Compound Universe
ü Time integrated ü Works in virtually any soil condition
ü Sensitive to a broader range of compounds at lower concentrations
Dedicated Laboratory
• GORETM Module analysis
• EPA Method 8260/8270
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Modified for thermal desorption
GC/MS
Compound specific
ppt sensitivity
Rigorous QA/QC Program
Accurate, reproducible results
Approved for RCRA, CERCLA, DOE and DOD sites
US EPA and state regulator agency acceptance
Commonly Detected Compounds
Volatiles
Semi-volatiles
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
Vinyl Chloride
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Methyl t-butyl ether
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
Benzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
Toluene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Undecane
o-Xylene
Tridecane
m,p-Xylene
Pentadecane
Octane
Naphthalene
1,1-Dichloroethane
2-Methylnaphthalene
1,2-Dichloroethane
Acenaphthene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Acenaphthylene
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Fluorene
1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
1,1-Dichloroethene
Fluoranthene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
Pyrene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Trichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Chloroform
Carbon Tetrachloride
NOTE:
This
is
not
a
comprehensive list
Chlorobenzene
of compound
1,4-Dioxane
detection or analytical
Freons
capabilities.
Fuel Oxygenates
Explosives
Nitrobenzene
2-Nitrotoluene
3-Nitrotoluene
4-Nitrotoluene
1,3-Dinitrobenzene
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene
2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene
Mercury (elemental)
Pesticides/Herbicides
PCB Cogeners
Capabilities demonstrated.
Chemical Agents/Breakdown Products
Mustard (as a TIC)
1,4-dithiane
1,4-oxathiane
Benzothiozole
p-Chlorophenylmethylsulfide
p-Chlorophenylmethylsulfoxide
p-Chlorophenylmethylsulfone
Dimethyldisulfide
DIMP (Diisopropyl methylphosphonate)
DMMP (Dimethyl methylphosphonate)
4-chloroacetophenone
2-chloroacetophenone
* - partial list
Typical Sites
• Industrial & manufacturing complexes
• Petroleum refining complexes
• Bulk fuel storage facilities
• Gas stations
• Dry cleaners
• Chemical plants
• Military bases
• Brownfields
• Pipelines
• Landfills
* - partial list
Delivers Needed Information
•Broad range of organic compounds –with ppt sensitivity
•Reduces data variability - with time integrated sampling
•Simple operation - minimizes sampling error
•Rapid, inexpensive and unobtrusive installation
•Works in soil gas, air, or water
•Strengthens your Conceptual Site Model
Saves Time and Money
Environmental “X-ray”
Source
Source
•Accurately
•Accuratelydelineate
delineatesource
sourceand
andextent
extent
•Sample
•Sampleto
toresolve
resolvethe
theobjective
objective
•Avoid
•Avoidundersampling
undersampling
•Focus
•Focussubsequent
subsequentsampling
sampling
Extent
Extent
Where
Where would
would you
you sample
sample soil
soil
or
or water?
water?
GORETM Survey Service
•
•
•
•
•
Pre-survey assistance (grid design)
GORETM Modules
Analysis
Maps and report
Post-survey assistance (data interpretation)
Case Studies
Vehicle Maintenance Garage –BTEX & MtBE
Background
• Vehicle maintenance garage
• Delineate suspected BTEX plume
• Optimize monitoring well placement
• Silty clays; 3 to 8 M groundwater depth
• 27 GORETM Modules, average 7 M sample spacing
UST Pit
“BTEX - Great
Comparison
between
Groundwater
Data & Gore
Data”
Suspected UST
Location
UST Pit
“MtBE”
Suspected UST
Location
Vehicle Maintenance Garage - MtBE
Conclusions
• Five monitoring wells installed
• Non-detects in soil borings
• Groundwater and soil gas data compare favorably
• MtBE plume “leads”BTEX plume
Service Station
Background
• Active service station
• Dissolved gasoline observed in wells
• Silty clay above bedrock
• 4 –6 M groundwater depth, flat gradient
• Site currently undergoing remediation
• 26 GORETM Modules on one acre, 15 M sample spacing
“BTEX”
Service Station
Conclusions
• Soil gas results confirmed known plume
• Soil gas results identified new contamination
•Transfer line leak at pump island connection
•Soil remediation accomplished before ground
water impacted
•Comprehensive site picture achieved
Passive Soil Gas Sampling Outperforms Active
Background
• Bulk fuel storage terminal
• Silty clay, fill material
• 1 to 2 M groundwater depth, steep gradient
• 25 GORETM Modules on 0.64 acres, 15 M spacing
• Free-product in wells: gasoline and fuel oils
BTEX
(Active soil gas)
BTEX
(Passive soil gas)
Permeability (10-8)
Diesel Range PAH
(Passive Soil Gas)
Passive Soil Gas Sampling Outperforms Active
Conclusions
• Passive soil gas & groundwater data compare well
• Active survey results impacted by soil permeability
• PAHs (diesel) detected by passive sampling only
Long-Term Monitoring for Reduced Liability in Property Transfer
Background
• Operating service station at time of sale
• On-going remediation of known release
• Sandy silts; 3 M groundwater depth
• 15 permanent locations, average 15 M spacing
• Establish soil gas data baseline
• Seller monitors soil gas - new releases
• Limits liability
Baseline Survey
Six Month Survey
“BTEX”
Baseline Survey
Six Month Survey
“Naphthalene”
Conclusions
• Second survey detected significant changes
• Free-product now found in MW-6
• Site investigation confirmed soil gas results
• Recent fuel release documented
• Remedial system upgrade - $110,000
• Seller liability minimized
• Buyer accountable for continued site restoration
Deep Groundwater Survey - Gasoline
Background
• Gasoline in groundwater (200-300ppb)
• No soil contamination
• 3 M clay layer over fractured limestone
• 60M groundwater depth
• 99 modules, 33M sample spacing
• Sample between homes
• Fractured limestone - contaminant conduits
• Gas station removed 10 yrs prior - source area
FORMER GAS
STATION
Conclusions
• Soil gas results consistent with
• Suspected source area
• Known fracture location
• Groundwater gradient
• Survey sensitive to low ppb levels in deep groundwater
through challenging stratigraphy
• TX regulators confirmed source area, groundwater
gradient, and suspected fracture location
Remediation Monitoring
Background
• Monitor the remediation progress
• Sand, gravel and fill; 2 M groundwater depth
• 35 permanent locations, 10M spacing; multiple surveys
• Exposure period, sample depth, analysis, contour intervals
held constant
• Free product removal
1,223.8 ug/L
1.24 ug/L
Nov/Dec 1994 Sampling
7.83 ug/L
May 1994 Sampling
“BTEX”
June/July 1996 Sampling
bdl ug/L
bdl ug/L
April 1995 Sampling
“BTEX”
465 ug/L
445 ug/L
bdl ug/L
Remediation Monitoring
Conclusions
• Maps illustrate change in plume over time
• Clearly reflects remediation success
• 4,600 ug/l decreased to 146 ug/l in plume core
• Groundwater & soil gas data compare favorably
• Matrix sampling costs greatly reduced
Optimizing Well Placement
Background
• Manufacturing facility
• Chlorinated compounds in groundwater
• 10 M weathered, “tight”clay (10-8), fractured bedrock
• Groundwater ~10 M depth
• 77 modules, 10 x 1 M sample spacing
• Geophysical survey lacked resolution
• Active soil gas survey failed
• Objective: optimize recovery well placement
SOURCE AREA
“Groundwater
Data”
“Soil Gas Data
& New Recovery
Well”
Conclusions
• Detection of TCE in soil gas
• Sample spacing delineated suspect fracture
• Recovery well location optimized
• 25x increase in fluid removal
• 75% increase in TCE removal
Large Scale Site Assessment - Pinpointing the Problem = ROI
GoreTM Survey
• 800 acres, ~950 modules
• Grid spacing - 15 to 100 M
• One M installation depth
• 14 day exposure
Unlined
Wastewater
Ditches
Groundwater
Flow
Warehouse
Area
Building
Complex
Storage
Yard
0
1,000 ft
TM Survey
GORE
GORETM
Survey -- TCE
TCE
Oil/Water
Oil/Water Separator
Separator
TCE
TCE -- 26,000
26,000 ppb
ppb
SVE
SVE Pilot
Pilot Study
Study
0
1,000 ft
Large Scale Site Assessment - Pinpointing the Problem = ROI
Conclusions
• GORETM Survey confirmed known sources
• Critical level of site assessment
• Previous unidentified source(s) investigated
• Contaminated soil below separator - major source
• 6,000 lbs TCE in soil (estimated)
• Source removal most effective remedial action
• SVE pilot test - 3,900 lbs of solvent - six months
• Monitoring well downgradient
• TCE - decreased ~1,700 ug/l - six months
• Remedial action plan modified
• Significant short & long-term cost savings realized
Soil Gas Results for Gore™ Sorbents in
GORE™ Module and Glass Vials
Thank-You
Shalom
•Raphi Mandelbaum, Ph.D & Rony Bruell
–LDD Technologies
•
•
•
•
George Shaw
W L Gore & Associates, Inc.
[email protected]
1+410-506-4776
Technology Update:
Concentration Capability
Soil Gas
Air
CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS
AIR:
ug / m3 = Mass / System Factor / [Sampling Rate x Exposure Time]
SOIL GAS: ug / m3 = Air / Soil Effectiveness Factor
Mass
- GC/MS measured mass from the passive sampler
System Factor - Corrects for efficiency of adsorption & desorption as
affected by adsorbent, compound & method
Sampling Rate - L/hr of air collected by the sampler
Soil Effectiveness
Factor (E)
- Deff –ƒ(porosity, pore water content, H, Dwater)
- E = Deff/Dair
Millington, R.J. and J.M. Quirk. 1961
Johnson and Ettinger 1991
Air Monitoring - Home Basement
Naphthalene Uptake Over One Week
Indoor Air Data
250.00
y = 1.3586x + 3.6717
200.00
Mass, ng
- Naphthalene
- linear uptake
- stable concentration
2
R = 0.964
150.00
100.00
50.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00
Exposure Hours
Concentration, ng/m 3
Air Monitoring - Home Basement
Naphthalene Calculated Concentrations
2500.00
2000.00
1500.00
1000.00
500.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
Exposure Time, Hours
Former Dry Cleaner –Credit Union
• Two sample locations
– One outside & one inside
• Summa cannister and
2 GORE™ Modules
• 24-hour sampling period
ppbv
PCE
Summa
in
0.047
Gore
0.046
Gore
0.046
Summa
out
0.048
Gore
0.040
Gore
0.021
Comparison of Gore Data to TO-17 Active Sampling
3
GORE Passive Sampling (ug/m )
120
Bedroom
Dining Room
Basement
Linear (Dining Room)
100
Dining Room
y = 0.9575x
Notes:
- Active used same adsorbent mix and analysis method
- Compounds plotted include: BTEX, Benzene, Toluene,
80 PCE, 1,4 DCB, ChCl3, CCl4
- Active over 5 hours in morning of initial sampling
- Passive sampling over 24 hours of initial sampling
R2 = 0.9921
60 - Un-inhabited Dining Room correlation = 0.99
- Inhabited Bedroom and Basement correlation = 0.97
40
20
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
3
Active Sampling (ug/m )
Calculated and Measured Concentrations
• 1 M sample depth
• One hour exposure
• Correlates spatially
• Matches P5
TCE
503053 –2.7 ppmv
503055 - 8.8 ppmv
503051 –17.1 ppmv
P-5 - 9.4 ppmv
Technology Update:
Concentration Capability
Water
Concentrations in water
• SR(well) = SRo x ZP x ZT [=] L/hr
– SRo = Reference sampling rate
• Measured experimentally at 21C, 0.8 ft of water
– ZP = Pressure calibration (for water column above sample point)
• # pressure, $ vapor pressure, $ well sampling rate
– ZT = Temperature calibration
• $ temperature,
$ vapor pressure,
$ well sampling rate
• Concentration
= mass/(time)/SR(well)
= ug/hr/(L/hr) = ug/L
• Example
Compound
Aquifer Temp (C)
Ft of Water
15º Cè ZT = 0.822
15’è ZP = 0.71
SRº
0.0064 L/hr
SR (well)
0.0037 L/hr
Exposure Time (hr)
Mass measured (ug)
Concentration
PCE
1 hr
6.0 ug
1600 ug/L
Dry Cleaner
Concentrations - Bailer
PCE, TCE, cis-1,2-DCE (ug/L)
30000
20000
C1,2-DCE
TCE
PCE
Linear
10000
0
•
•
y = 1.1611x
R2=0.982
N=12
0
10000 20000
30000
Concentrations - Passive
Compared to slow purge and disposable bailer
Good correlation
KN O T
S U RFA CE
(Sec u re t o w ellh ead )
S T RIN G
T A G W IT H U N IQ U E
S ERIA L N U M B ER
243871
S O RB EN T
W EIGH T
243871
LO O P FO R
A T T A CH IN G ST RIN G
• Partitioning
• Liquid to vapor phase
• Henry’
s Law
• Diffusion
• Adsorption
TRICHLOROETHENE
200
MW 12-01
TCE (ave, ug)
150
y = 0.0981x
R2 = 0.99
100
MW 06-04
50
MW 12-06
0
MW 12-09
0
MW 06-09
500
1000
1500
2000
TCE @ T48 (ug/l)
“… results show that GORE-SORBER Water Quality Monitoring can
be used to monitor long-term concentration trends… ”
“… optimally suited for relatively low-cost concentration trend
monitoring and screening.”
Case Study - GORETM Surveys for Water Quality Monitoring
Background
• Military facility
• 30+ years munitions testing
• Groundwater contaminated ~2,000 ug/l
• Groundwater depth up to 10 M feet
• Unconsolidated alluvial deposits
• Large network of wells
• Two co-sampling phases-July 1997 & Dec 1998
Phase 1 - Passive Data
Phase 1 - Groundwater Data
Phase 2 - Passive Data
Phase 2 - Groundwater Data
Ground Water (ug/l)
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
R2 = 0.9978
y = 55.566x
n = 22
0
5
10
Phase
Phase 11 Co-Sampling
Co-Sampling
R2 = 0.9978
n = 22
15
•Model
•Model Result
Result
20
Passive Data (ug)
1800
1600
Phase
Phase 22 Co-Sampling
Co-Sampling
1400
1200
•Model
•Model Result
Result
•Additional
•Additional New
NewWell
Well Data
Data
•Additional
Ground
•Additional “
“
Ground Truth”Data
Truth”Data
1000
800
R2 = 0.9217
y = 27.601x
600
400
n = 28
200
R2 = 0.9217
n = 28
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
P a ssive Da ta (ug)
Case Study - GORETM Surveys for Water Quality Monitoring
Item
Traditional Groundwater Sampling
Project management
Field crew
Equipment –pump
Purge water disposal
Laboratory costs
Units
Unit Description
Extended Cost
42
235
1
0
26
Hours
Hours
Lump sum
Disposal fee
Samples
$2,145
$12,993
$1,765
*
$7,452
TOTAL
GORETM Survey Water Quality Monitoring
Project management
Field crew
Equipment –consumables
Laboratory costs
TOTAL
$24,355
4
31
1
26
Hours
Hours
Lot charge
Samples
$204
$1,324
$100
$5,070
$6,698
* Note: Due to the availability of an on-site treatment system, purge water disposal costs are not included. However, this is typically a
large part of a groundwater sampling budget.
Thank-You
Shalom
•Raphi Mandelbaum, Ph.D & Rony Bruell
–LDD Technologies
•
•
•
•
George Shaw
W L Gore & Associates, Inc.
[email protected]
1+410-506-4776

Proven to Focus Your Efforts Proven to Focus Your Efforts

Transcription

Similar documents

Telstra Proprietary - George Town CA2 Map GEWN DA18 Telstra