Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> <br /> I <br /> ! <br /> I <br />I <br /> $. <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> $. <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />On p. P-132 it states that the flow direction in the bedrock aquifer could not be <br />determined on-site due to limited water level data. On p. P-125 it states that four <br />bedrock piezometer have been installed at the site. Table P.F.1 lists four wells <br />screened in the bedrock (MW-4C, MW-11C, MW-34C and MW-35C), but then <br />notes that two were not installed. The actual number of bedrock wells or <br />piezometers at Site P was not readily apparent. A minim_urn of three points are <br />needed to determine groundwater flow direction, so ff t~.-~-e-e--or more wells exist, the . <br />groundwater flow direction could be estimated. <br /> <br />Tables P.F. 1 and P.F.3 indicate that well MW-1BB is completed in buried outwash, <br />but cross-section H-H' (Figure P.E. 12) shows that MW-1BB is completed in <br />Superior Till. This apparent conflict was not resolved. <br /> <br />On p. P-146 it states that "all vertical flow velocities are at least two to three orders <br />of magnitude less than horizontal flow velocities." This is not true - in general <br />horizontal velocities range from 0.28 to 2.26 feet/day (table P.F.9) while vertical <br />velocities range from 0.004 to 0.6 feet/day (Table P.F. 10). Most horizontal <br />velocities are approximately one order of magnitude (10' times) greater than vertical <br />velocities; not two to three orders of magnitude (100 - 1,000 times) greater. The <br />significance of this point is that there is a relatively strong vertical component to <br />flow direction which could poss~ly influence transport of potential groundwater <br />contamination. <br /> <br />There is no site specific discussion with regard to the hydrogeologic properties of <br />the bedrock beneath Site P. The Regional Hydrogeology section stated that "the St. <br />Lawrence Fm. is considered a confining bed because of its low hydraulic <br />conductivity... The Franconia-Ironton-Galesville formations (which underlie the St. <br />Lawrence) from a common aquifer... [However,] the Franconia is sometimes <br />classified as an aquitard (p. P-89)." The Site Geology section indicates that "the St. <br />Lawrence overlies the Franconia Fm. to an estimated depth of 40 feet; however, <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />