1111111111111111111111111111111 dsooo

Document Separator

1111111111111111111111111111111

DSOOO

Document ID Number

111111111111111111111111111

38734

Golder Associates Inc.

1951 Old Culhbert Road. Suite 301 Cherry Hill. NJ 08034

(fI~ - :AssOCIates Tel: (856) 616-8166 Fax: (856) 616-1874

GROUNDWATER PUMPING TEST WORK PLAN ROUND HOUSEIW ASTE RECLAMATION AREA

EAST SIDE SHOREHAM FACILITY (VIC SITE ID VP5080)

MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

Prepared for:

Soo Line Railroad Company d/b/a Canadian Pacific Railway 50 I Marquette Avenue

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402

Submitted to: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Unit 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155

Prepared by:

Golder Associates Inc. 1951 Old Cuthbert Road, Suite 301

Cherry Hill, NJ 08034

DISTRIBUTION:

2 Copies 2 Copies 2 Copies 4 Copies

June 2006

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Soo Line Railroad Company Leonard, Street & Deinard Golder Associates Inc .

Project No.: 023-6\05-006

OFFICES ACROSS ASIA, AUSTRALIA, EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA, SOUTH AMERICA

June 2006 - 1 - 023-6 \05-006

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............. ................... ..... .......................... .... ...... ... ...... ............ ... ........ ..... I

2.0 SITE SETTING .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .... .. ...... ... ... ......... .... ... .... .. .... .. ... .. .............. .................. ........ ...... 2 2.1 Site Geology .... .. ... .. .... ... ... .. .... ........ ..... ............ .. ... ... .. ....... ..... .... ............................ 2 2.2 Site Hydrogeology ................... .................................... ... ....................................... 4 2.3 Groundwater Chemistry ........................................................ .... ... .. ..... .. .... .... .... ..... 4

3.0 DRILLING AND HYDROGEOLOGIC TESTING PROGRAM ... .. ... ...... .. ...................... 6 3.1 Well Development .. ...................................................... .. ....... ... ... .. .... .................... 8 3.2 Testing Equipment Configuration ...... ............. .. .............. .... ....... ... ... .... .... ....... ... ... 8 3.3 Hydrogeologic Testing ... ... .... ... .... .... .......... ... .... .. .. ... ...... .. .............. ..... .................. 9 3.4 Water Sampling and Permit Compliance ....... ...... ... .. ...... ............. ......... .. ............. II 3.5 Hydrogeologic Testing Analysis Methods ...................... ....... .... .... ..... .... ........ .... 12

4.0 SCHEDULE AND REPORTING ......... ............................. ... ...... ..................................... 15 4.1 Schedule .. .. .................. ... ... ...... ..... .... ................ ............. .............. .. .. ...... .. ... ..... ..... 15 4.2 Reporting ..... .................... ....... ... ...... ... .... ... ... ... ... ................................ ... .... .......... 15

5.0 REFERENCES ... .. ........... .............. ........... ........ .... ..................... .... ..... ... ... .. ........... ........ ... 16

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Table 2

Well Construction Information Analytical Testing Program

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3

Site Location Map Geologic Cross Section A-A' Pumping Test Schedule

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Visual Synthesis Approach for Transient Test Data Analysis (Paper presented at the 2004 Fractured Rock Conference, NGW A and USEPA, 2004)

Golder Associates G:\PROJ ECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPiNG TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - I - 023-6105-006

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This groundwater pumping test work plan has been prepared by Golder Associates Inc. (Golder)

on behalf of Soo Line Railroad Company, doing business as Canadian Pacific Railway (Soo

Line), in connection with the Round HouselWaste Reclamation area of the East Side of the

Shoreham Facility in Minneapolis, Minnesota (East-Side Shoreham Facility, or Site). The East

Side Shoreham Facility is identified as VIC Site No. 5080 under the Minnesota Pollution Control

Agency (MPCA) Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) program. This work plan has been

prepared pursuant to the approved Response Action Plan for the East Side Shoreham Facility

(Golder, 2005a). The field work and analyses will be conducted by Golder and its subcontractors

on behalf of Soo Line.

The proposed activities include:

• Drilling and installation of one (I) 4-inch diameter groundwater extraction well (Shallow Well) and one (I) 2-inch diameter monitoring well to a depth of 90 feet below ground surface (ft bgs).

• Drilling and installation of one (I) 6-inch diameter groundwater extraction wen within the glacial outwash unit (Deep Wen) to a depth of 195 ft bgs;

• Implementation of pumping tests at each location, comprised of a step-drawdown test and a constant rate pumping test at each of the new extraction wells, while observing responses in an array of new and existing monitoring wells; and

• Pumping test analysis and reporting.

The following sections provide background and procedures that will be used to achieve these

goals. The work plan is organized as follows:

• Section 2 presents the Site setting including a description of the lithologic units, hydrogeology and groundwater chemistry;

• Section 3 provides a description of the drilling activities, sampling, and hydrogeologic testing programs; and,

• Section 4 presents the schedule and reporting procedures.

Golder Associates G:\PROJECT$\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 2 - 023-6105-006

2.0 SITE SETTING

The pumping test area is located in the southeastern portion of the Shoreham Facility (Figure I).

The geology, hydrogeology and groundwater chemistry are well characterized from previous Site

investigations. The following presents a brief summary of the geologic and hydrogeologic

conditions encountered in the vicinity of the testing area.

2.1 Site Geology

Unconsolidated deposits include Fill, Alluvium, Glacial Till, Glacio-Lacustrine Clay, and

Outwash Deposits. A detailed geologic cross section through the area of interest is presented as

Figure 2. Figure I shows the location of the cross section. Descriptions of the unconsolidated and

bedrock units were presented in the Remedial Investigation Report for the East Side Shoreham

Facility (RT) (Golder, 2005b), and brief summaries of the relevant units present at the proposed

pumping test locations are provided below:

Alluvium - Alluvial deposits comprise the uppermost, natural geologic material at the Site. The

alluvium consists of fine to coarse grained, well-to-poorly graded, silty-sand to sand, intermixed

with medium to coarse gravel. The alluvial deposits range from less than one foot in thickness to

as much as 70 feet in the deeper channels inset into the underlying formation. At the Shallow

Well location, this unit is about 35 feet thick, and at the Deep Well location, about 28 feet thick.

The elevation oftop of the alluvial deposits is about 850 feet in the pumping test areas.

Glacial Till - The Glacial Till at the Site varies in color from brown, grey brown to grey. It

consists of clayey silt, silty clay, sandy silt, and silty sand mixed with sub-angular or angular rock

clasts and cobbles. The thickness of the Glacial Till ranges from 0 feet to 30 feet, and tends to

thin towards the western part of the Site, particularly as the bedrock elevation rises, and the till is

locally discontinuous within the bedrock valley/depression area. At the proposed location of the

Shallow Well the till is approximately 21 feet thick; at the proposed location of the Deep Well

this unit is locally discontinuous. The elevation of the top ofthe Glacial Till unit ranges from 830

feet to 845 feet in the pumping test areas.

Glacio-Lacustrine Clay - These deposits generally occur as thin horizons directly beneath the

Glacial Till, although several other deeper horizons of varved, or laminated clays have been

reported within the main body of the underlying Outwash Deposits. The Glacio-Lacustrine Clay

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.OOC

June 2006 - 3 - 023-6105-006

layers range in thickness from less than half a foot to as much as 14 feet. Glacio-Lacustrine Clay

has not been previously reported near the location of the Shallow Well; four horizons of this unit

were observed near the location of the Deep Well in boring SB02-63C ranging in thickness from

0.1 feet to 2 feet at elevations of 664, 741, 798 and 813 feet above mean sea level (msl).

Outwash Deposits - The Outwash deposits consist of poorly graded, fine to coarse, gravelly

sand. The thickness of the Outwash ranges from 0 feet to 150 feet and this deposit occurs mainly

within the confines of the buried valley/depression. The Outwash Deposits generally rest directly

on the scoured bedrock surface and infill valley bottoms. At the proposed Shallow Well location,

the outwash is about 4 feet thick; at the proposed location of the Deep Well, the unit is about 150

feet thick.

St. Peter Sandstone - The St. Peter Sandstone in the Site area is a white to light-gray, mostly

vety fine-grained to medium-grained quartz sandstone, which is a loose, friable, and poorly

cemented rock. This unit is massively bedded to weakly cross-stratified. The thickness of the

unit ranges from 0 foot to 70 feet. The proposed Shallow Well is located above the western side

of the bedrock valley where the erosional contact of the St. Peter Sandstone and outwash is

relatively steep. Much of the outwash in this area is reworked St. Peter Sandstone and the two

units are very similar hydrogeologically. At the location of the proposed Deep Well, the St. Peter

Sandstone has been completely eroded and is not present.

St. Peter Mudstone - The St. Peter Mudstone unit, is a light greenish grey to yellow unit,

comprising interbedded multi-color layers of mudstone, siltstone, shale, and/or sandstone. At the

location of the proposed Shallow Well, the upper surface of this unit is present at about 115 feet

below ground (740 ft. elevation) and the thickness of this unit is about 70 feet; the unit is not

present at the location of the proposed Deep Well.

Prairie du Chien Group - The Prairie du Chien Group is comprised of two formations including

the Shakopee Formation and the Oneota Dolomite. The uppermost part of the Prairie du Chien

Group, the Shakopee Formation, is light brown to pale-yellow-brown, thin to medium bedded

karstic dolostone interlayered with thin beds of fine to medium-grained quartz sandstone and

green-gray shale. The upper surface of the Prairie du Chien Group at the locations of the Shallow

Well and Deep Well are at elevations of approximately 670 feet and 657 feet, respectively, which

corresponds to depths of approximately 185 and 197 feet below ground surface, respectively. At

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP,DOC

June 2006 -4- 023-6105-006

the location of the Deep Well, the Prairie du Chien is overlain directly with outwash, and has

been eroded 10-15 feet more than at the Shallow Well location, where the basal mudstone unit of

the St. Peter Sandstone overlies the Prairie du Chien.

2.2 Site Hydrogeology

Groundwater flow at the Site is locally controlled by the bedrock valley/depression feature, the

axis of which extends from the southeastern comer of the Shoreham Facility to the east of the

comer of 29th Avenue NE and Central Avenue. In the unconsolidated sediments west of the

bedrock depression, flow is generally to the east. This flow pattern is created by the draining

effect of the buried valley/depression in combination with the low hydraulic conductivity of the

basal mudstone unit of the St. Peter Sandstone, which limits downward groundwater movement

in many areas of the Site. This creates head differences of up to five feet between the shallow

groundwater and the Prairie du Chien. Over the bedrock depression, the groundwater gradients in

the overburden are primarily downward. In the erosional "window" where the Prairie du Chien is

not separated from the Outwash Deposits by the basal mudstone of the St. Peter Formation, the

highly conductive Prairie du Chien acts as a sink for the groundwater in the unconsolidated

sediments. Recharge of the Prairie du Chien from the overlying Outwash Deposits creates a

groundwater mound in the Prairie du Chien centered on the axis of the bedrock depression.

Regional groundwater flow in the Prairie du Chien is generally to the south, but in the localized

area of the erosional window, some radial flow is indicated.

2.3 Groundwater Chemistry

Groundwater in the pumping test areas is impacted with chlorinated Volatile Organic Chemicals

(cVOCs). The following chemicals in the Round HouselWaste Reclamation areas are the primary

groundwater contaminants of concern and are used for this general discussion of the nature and

extent of groundwater impacts, consistent with the RAP (Golder, 2005a).

1. Tetrachloroethene (PCE); 2. Trichloroethene (TCE); 3. cis-I ,2-dichloroethene (cis-I ,2-DCE); 4. I, I, I-Tetrachloroethane (1 ,1, I-TCA); 5. I ,I-dichloroethane (I ,I-DCA) and, 6. I ,I-dichloroethene (I ,I-DCE).

For purposes of this work plan, the sum of these compounds (plus vinyl chloride and 1,1,2-

trichloroethane) is defined as total cVOCs. In the vicinity of the proposed Shallow Well location,

the highest impacts are located above an elevation of 775 about feet (up to 6,160 ugiL cVOCs).

Golder Associates G:\PROJECT$\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 5 - 023-6105-006

At the location of the Deep Well, the highest impacts (in hydroprofile SB02-63C) are located

below elevation 695 ft msl (9,000 to 12,000 ug/L cVOCs).

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 6- 023-6105-006

3.0 DRILLING AND HYDROGEOLOGIC TESTING PROGRAM

The well installation and testing procedures for each location are as follows:

• Shallow Pumping Test

The test configuration consists of a new extraction well and a new monitoring well located 70 feet

to the northeast of the extraction well and screened at the same elevation within the shallow

outwashiSt. Peter Sandstone (Figure 1). The following six existing monitoring wells MW04-95-

T, MW04-29-T, MW04-28-I, MW04-31-SP, MW04-31-T, and MW04-26-T will also be used as

observation wells during extraction testing.

The following overall approach is proposed for the drilling, installation, and testing:

l. Drill the 4-inch diameter pumping test well at the location shown on Figure l. The rotosonic drilling method will be used. The well will be advanced to a depth of 90 feet bgs and a 20-foot long, 4-inch diameter stainless steel screen will be installed at 70 to 90 ft bgs;

2. During rotosonic bedrock drilling, the pressure response in one or more adjacent monitoring wells will be recorded to provide preliminary information on the potential hydraulic influence of this well. Measurements will be made with pressure transducers having a sensitivity of at least 0.01 ft of water and at a recording interval of 1 minute;

3. Drill the new monitoring well using the rotosonic drilling method at the location shown on Figure 1, advancing the borehole to a depth of 90 feet bgs and setting a 10-foot long , 2-inch diameter stainless steel screen at 80 to 90 ft bgs;

4. Following well development, perform groundwater sampling of the two new wells and analyze for cVOCs using a field test kit and a fixed laboratory;

5. Place data loggers/transducers in the Shallow extraction well, new monitoring well, MW04-95-T, MW04-29-T, MW04-28-I, and MW04-31-SP.

6. Conduct a step-drawdown test and 72-hour constant rate pumping test followed by recovery monitoring. Perform additional manual head measurements in monitoring wells MW04-26-T and MW04-31-T during constant rate testing. Collect groundwater samples from the pumping test well during the step-drawdown test for MCES permit analytes (including cVOCs) and cVOCs with the field analysis test kit. Collect groundwater samples from the pumping test well during the constant rate tests for laboratory analysis. Treat the extracted groundwater with granular activated carbon (GAC), temporarily store the water in 21,000 gallon Baker tanks and collect samples of the water for c VOCs with the field analysis test kit prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer (assuming previous comparisons oflaboratory and field tests for cVOCs are satisfactory).


June 2006 - 7 - 023-6\05-006

• Deep Pumping Test

The test configuration includes a new extraction well within the deep outwash, and an array of

fifteen monitoring wells including the new monitoring well that was installed for the Shallow

Test, and 14 existing monitoring wells as discussed below.

The following overall approach is proposed for the drilling, installation and testing:

1. Drill the 6-inch diameter pumping test well at the location shown on Figure 1. The rotosonic drilling method will be used to drill a pilot hole for lithologic logging, and the well will then be installed using the mud rotary method I . The well will be advanced to a depth of 195 feet bgs and a 40-foot long, 6-inch diameter stainless steel screen installed at 155 to 195 ft bgs;

2. During rotosonic bedrock drilling, the pressure response in one or more adjacent monitoring wells will be recorded to provide preliminary information on the potential hydraulic influence of this well. Measurements will be made with pressure transducers having a sensitivity of at least 0.01 ft of water and at a recording interval of 1 minute;

3. Following well development, perform groundwater sampling of the Deep Extraction Well and MW04-30-BR and analyses for cVOCs using a field test kit and a fixed laboratory;

4. Place data loggers/transducers in the new monitoring well, as well as MW04-30-BR, MW04-28-I, MW04-29-BR, MW00-43-BR and MW02-01 -0PD;

5. Conduct a step-drawdown test and 72-hour constant rate pumping test followed by recovery monitoring. Perform additional manual measurements in monitoring wells MW04-29-T, MW04-28-T, MW04-28-0PD, MWOO-43-T, MW04-26-BR, MW04-90-OPD, MW06-01-BR, MW06-01-I, and MW06-01-T during the constant rate pumping test. Collect groundwater samples from the pumping test well during the constant rate tests for laboratory analysis. Treat the extracted groundwater with granular activated carbon (GAC), temporarily store the water in 21 ,000 gallon Baker tanks and collect samples of the water for cVOCs with the field analysis test kit prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer (assuming previous comparisons of laboratory and field tests for cVOCs are satisfactory).

Sections 3.1 through 3.5 present the detailed procedures for well drilling, development and

testing.

Boart Longyear Company of Little Falls, MN (Boart), a Minnesota licensed drilling firm, will be

utilized as the drilling subcontractor. Golder and/or Boart will obtain all necessary drilling

permits. Following completion, the location and elevation of the wells will be surveyed by Sunde

Land Surveying, LLC of Bloomington, MN, a Minnesota registered land surveying firm. Field

I A 6-inch diameter well cannot be installed by rotosonic methods.

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EA$T SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 8 - 023-6105-006

work will be conducted in accordance with the Site Specific Health and Safety Plan (AMEC,

2002a) and Quality Assurance Project Plan (AMEC, 2002b).

3.1 Well Development

The pumping test wells and new monitoring well will be developed plior to groundwater chemistry

sampling and hydraulic testing. The wells will be developed using air lift techniques and other

techniques, if necessary, until relatively clear water is produced and field parameters (pH, specific

conductance and turbidity) stabilize indicating good hydraulic connnunication with the surrounding

water bearing zone.

All investigation derived waste (IDW) generated during well drilling and development, including

soil cuttings and development and purge water, will be containerized and staged on-site. Similar to

other field work conducted at the site, the IDW will be characterized and disposed following

completion of the testing. Soil will be sampled and disposed by Onyx Waste Services at a

permitted landfill. The water will be sampled and disposed in accordance with the existing

Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) pennit for the site.

3.2 Testing Eqnipment Confignration

Following well development and initial sampling, a Grundfos Model 40S pump with a 3

horsepower (HP) motor or equivalent will be installed in the pumping test well for aquifer testing

purposes. This pump has the capability to pump at a rate of 50 gallons per minute (gpm) at a total

head of 157 feet of water, including lift, friction losses in pipe and fittings , and pressure losses in

treatment equipment. The flow rate will be controlled using a throttling valve and/or by use of a

variable speed drive. Piping will be connected from the pump discharge to a dual bag filter unit

followed by one 500-pound granular activated carbon (GAC) unit to treat the extracted water.

Two 21,000 gallon holding tanks, each connected with the GAC unit, will be utilized to

alternately hold extracted water for testing prior to discharge. Sample ports will be installed prior

to and after the GAC unit for sample collection.

The GAC unit is expected to treat the extracted water to meet the effluent limits required by a

MCES One Time Industrial Discharge Approval (MCES Discharge Approval), to be procured

prior to implementation of the test. The treated water will be temporarily stored in 21,000 gallon

Baker tanks, and will be tested using the SDL Quick® Volatile Organic Halides (VOH) Water


June 2006 - 9 - 023-6105-006

Test Kit (Ultraviolet-induced Colorimetry) in accordance with the MCES Discharge Approval.

(See section 3.4).

Once the treated water meets discharge requirements, it will be transferred to the sanitary sewer

(as shown on Figure 3) for additional treatment at the local publicly owned treatment works

(POTW). Two additional 21 ,000 gallon tanks will be on-site for buffer storage if additional

treatment is required, and additional tanks are available locally if needed.

3.3 Hydrogeologic Testing

Once the testing equipment and monitoring well transducers are installed and set-up as described

above, hydrogeologic testing will be performed to meet the following objectives:

• Provide hydraulic conductivity data for the aquifer materials; and,

• Provide flow rate, drawdown and radius of influence information for design of a full scale groundwater pumping system.

Slug testing will fIrst be conducted in the new monitoring well, followed by short term step

drawdown tests and longer term constant rate pumping tests of the extraction wells. Test

implementation procedures and data analysis methods are described below.

Slug Test Implementation Procedures

A rising head slug test will be conducted in accordance with ASTM D4044-96 and the Site Standard

Operating Procedure (AMEC, 2003) as follows:

I. The static water level will be measured using a water level probe;

2. An In-Situ TROLL TM transducerldatalogger will be lowered into the well and set up to record water level fluctuations . The TROLL ™ dataloggers automatically correct for fluctuations in barometric pressure. The minimum data collection interval may be as low as 0.1 seconds, and the data will be collected using a logarithmic collection interval;

3. A fIxed slug of known volume, such as a closed, weighted length of PVC pipe, will be lowered into the well, and the water level allowed to return to static conditions;

4. The test will be initiated by rapidly removing the slug and monitoring the recovery of the water level; and,

5. The test will be continued until the water level has returned to within at least 70% of the static level, or in the case of tight formations, for a period of 30 minutes, whichever is achieved fIrst.


June 2006 - \0 - 023-6\05-006

Pumpillg Test Implemelltatioll Procedures

The pumping test implementation includes the following steps:

• Background water level monitoring;

• Step drawdown test;

• Constant rate pumping test; and,

• Recovery monitoring.

Natural water level fluctuations in monitoring wells will be monitored for a minimum of 24 hours

prior to the implementation of the step-drawdown test.

Step-Drawdown Testing

The step-drawdown test will be conducted at each pumping well using an incremental pumping

rate. Each pumping rate (step) will be maintained constant for a duration of about 60 minutes to

100 minutes, and the water level changes will be measured in the pumping well and observation

wells. It is anticipated that five steps will be implemented and evaluated. However, additional

pumping steps may be implemented in the field if they are necessary to evaluate the sustainable

constant rate for the longer term test.

• Shallow Pumping Test

Based on previous slug test results, the long term pumping test will likely be performed at a

constant flow rate of approximately 10 gpm. As a result, the planned rates for the step test are

estimated to be 2 gpm, 5 gpm, \0 gpm, 15 gpm, and 20 gpm. After the completion of the step

drawdown test, the aquifer will be allowed to recover overnight.

• Deep Pumping Test

Based on previous slug test results, the long term pumping test will likely be performed at a

constant rate of 20 gpm. The planned rates for the step test are estimated to be 2 gpm, 5 gpm, \0

gpm, 20 gpm, and 50 gpm. The actual step pumping rates may be refined in the field. After the

completion of the step-drawdown test, the aquifer will be allowed to recover overnight.

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WQRK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 11 - 023-6105-006

Constant Rate Testing

The constant rate pumping test is scheduled to be conducted at each extraction well for a period

of 72 hours. The pumping rate will be finalized based on the step-drawdown testing results. The

groundwater flow rate will be monitored using a flow meter and the water levels will be recorded

using In-Situ TROLL"M transducers/dataloggers installed in the pumping welf and observation

wells. The water level measurements will be recorded on a logarithmic time scale, with one

second as the smallest time interval between two consecutive readings and ten minutes being the

maximum time interval. In addition, manual water level measurements will be periodically

recorded in the test well and additional observation wells for the purpose of verifying pressure

transducer calibration.

Recovery of water level in the test well following cessation of the pumping test will be measured

for 72 hours (or up to 95 percent recovery, whichever is achieved first) on approximately the

same logarithmic time scale.

3.4 Water Sampling and Permit Compliance

During the step drawdown testing, the extracted and treated water will be tested with the SDr

Quick® Volatile Organic Halides (YOH) Water Test Kit (Ultraviolet-induced Colorimetry) which

is approved per EPA SW-846, Method 8535 . It is anticipated that the field kit will provide

analyses for total c VOCs as defined in section 2.3 and this will be confirmed by comparison to

conventional results from a fixed laboratory. Fixed laboratory analyses will include pH,

cadmium, chromium, copper, cyanide, lead, mercury, nickel, zinc, chemical oxygen demand, total

suspended solids, VOCs and total toxic organics, in accordance with the requirements of a One

Time Discharge Pennit, to be issued by MCES.

During the constant rate test, the extracted and treated water will also be tested with the field test

kit. When the first holding tank has substantially filled with water, the discharge from the GAC

unit will be transfen'ed to a second holding tank, and a sample will be collected and analyzed

from the filled tank. The MCES discharge penn it will require cVOC concentrations of less than

or equal to 10 milligrams per liter (mgIL) total toxic organics, and less than or equal to 3 mgIL of

any individual compound. Because the field test kit measures total organic halides only,

discharge to the sanitary sewer will be perfonned only if the test kit indicates 3 mgIL or less.

2 The pumping well and monitoring well will be assigned IDs based on the Site nomenclature practice, prior to construction of the wells.


June 2006 - 12 - 023-6105-006

If the field test kits prove unreliable, all extracted water will be temporarily stored in 21,000

gallon Baker tanks, and each tank will be analyzed for VOCs in the laboratory. Upon receipt of

results that indicate compliance with MCES discharge limits, the water will be discharged to the

sanitary sewer.

During and after the pumping period five samples of untreated groundwater from the pumping

test well will be collected and analyzed for VOCs at a fixed laboratory. The groundwater samples

will be collected at the following intervals:

• Immediately after the start of the constant-rate test;

• 24 hours after the start ofthe test;

• 48 hours after the start of the test;

• 72 hours after the start of the test (before tuming off the pump); and,

• Following the end of the recovery test using low-flow purging methods.

The groundwater samples will be collected from sample ports on the discharge piping prior to the

GAC unit except for the final sample as indicated above.

Samples will also be collected from the new monitoring well, and existing monitoring wells

MW04-95-T and MW04-30-BR using low-flow purging methods following test completion. The

following field parameters will also be monitored and recorded during low-flow sampling: pH,

specific conductance (SC), dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, turbidity and oxidation

reduction potential (ORP). Water samples will be analyzed for VOCs utilizing EPA SW-846

Method 8260.

A level three data validation will be conducted on analytical results from the groundwater

samples. Data validation will be performed in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project

Plan and Site Standard Operating Procedures (AMEC, 2002b & 2003).

3.5 Hydrogeologic Testing Analysis Methods

The slug test will likely be analyzed using the methods developed by Bouwer and Rice (1976),

and Hvorslev (1951). Details of these and associated method assumptions can be found in

Kruseman and de Ridder (1992) and Hvorslev (1951).


June 2006 - 13 - 023-6105-006

The selection of the pumping test analysis method will be made based on the examination of the

time-drawdown data. However, the test analysis approach willlike1y include the following:

• Traditional analytical methods for aquifers with infinite areal extent (i.e., Theis, Jacob, Theis recovery); and,

• Analytical methods that allow for bounded and heterogeneous aquifer conditions using FlowDim (Golder Associates) or Interpret-2™ (Scientific Software-Intercomp, Inc., 1994) software packages.

Details of Theis, Jacob, Theis recovery and other classical test analysis methods and associated

assumptions can be found in Kruseman and de Ridder (1992). Generally, all these methods

assume a homogeneous aquifer material and thus may not strictly apply to the aquifer conditions

at the Site. However, in general, the early time data is indicative of the near borehole

transmissivity, for which the assumption of homogeneity may be valid; late time data is indicative

of the combined local and adjacent layer(s) transmissivity (e.g., Javandel and Witherspoon,

1983).

The pumping test results (pressure vs. time and the first derivative of pressure vs. time) will also

be analyzed using FlowDim software (Golder Associates) or Interpret-2 ™ (a standard petroleum

industry software program developed by Scientific Software-Intercomp, Inc. , 1994). These

approaches can identify test zone hydraulic parameters, boundary conditions and the presence or

absence of a "dual porosity" system. These software packages are based on the theories

developed by Bourdet and Gringarten (1980), Gringarten et a!. (1986), Olarewaju and Lee (1987),

and others, and allow for heterogeneous parameter distribution, non-radial flow geometry, and

variable boundary conditions. The test flow regime (e.g., radial composite, dual porosity, dual

permeability, etc.) is recognized by using the "diagnostic plot," which includes, in addition to the

drawdown data, the semi-log derivative of the drawdown (see below and Appendix A for

additional details).

The test flow regimes that can be identified using the derivative plot include:

Inner Boundary Formation Outer Boundary Wellbore Storage and Skin Homogeneous Infinite Acting Infinite Conductivity Fracture Dual Porosity Single Boundary Finite Conductivity Fracture Dual Permeability Wedge Uniform Flux Fracture Radial Composite Channel Partial Penetration Radial Composite Dual Porosity Open Ended Rectangle Line Source Closed Rectangle

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EAST SIDE PUMPING TEST$\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 14 - 023-6105-006

l ifT-------------------------------------------,

w ellborestorage ! Transition zone I Skin..,ffect

PressurelDrawdown Log-Log Curve

PressurelDrawdown Semi-Log Derivative 10· 10'

tOlCD

Radial flow infinite acting

Boundaries, Discontinuities, Heterogenei .

Test Flow Model Diagnostic Plot Using the PressnreIDrawdown Derivative

The figures below illustrate four different examples of test flow regimes and their influence on

the shape of the derivative. As a reference, the upper left plot shows a radial homogeneous test

flow model with wellbore storage and skin effects. The other plots show a radial composite flow

model (upper right), a dual porosity flow model (lower left) and a single impermeable boundary

model (lower right).

'~',--------------, ,~,----------------,

,,' ,,'

"

1 10' lOleo

,~ ,,' ,=" ,~ ,~ ,,' ,.

"

" ! • " j , ~

i lQ 1

n ! ,,'

E~n i i ~

,,' ,,' " ..• ~.~-. - -"

" ' 0' to/co

Examples of Test Flow Models and their Impact on the Shape of the Derivative

Golder Associates G:\PROJECTS\023-6105 CPR\EA$T SIDE PUMPING TESTS\WORK PLAN\EAST SIDE PUMP TEST WP.DOC

June 2006 - 15 - 023-6105-006

4.0 SCHEDULE AND REPORTING

4.1 Schedule

The preliminary schedule for the pumping test, shown as Figure 3, is contingent upon approval of

this Work Plan by MPCA and securing the required discharge pelmit. The approximate duration

of various tasks of the scope of work is indicated, and the dependency of tasks on each other is

also shown. This schedule is approximate and may be subject to change based on field

conditions; MPCA will be advised of all such changes.

4.2 Reporting

Upon completion of the pumping test, the results will be analyzed, and incorporated into the Site

wide numerical groundwater flow model. A technical memorandum report will be provided to

MPCA that will include all available boring logs, groundwater chemistry data and hydraulic

testing results. The results will be utilized in preparing the Groundwater Response Action Design

Report for the Waste Reclamation \ Round House \ Shops Area.


June 2006 - 16 - 023-610S-006

5.0 REFERENCES

AMEC Earth and Environmental, 2002a. Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan, Hazardous Waste Operations, Shoreham Facility, Canadian Pacific Railway, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

AMEC Earth and Environmental, 2002b. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Shoreham Facility, Canadian Pacific Railway, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

AMEC Earth and Environmental, 2003. Standard Operating Procedure Document, Shoreham Facility, Canadian Pacific Railway, Minneapolis, Minnesota, revised March 2003.

Bourdet, D., and Gringarten, A.C., 1980, Determination of fissure volume and block size in fractured reservoirs by type-curve analysis: Society of Petroleum Engineers Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibit, Dallas, Texas, paper SPE9293, 20 p.

Bouwer, H. and R.C. Rice, 1976. A slug test for determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers with completely or partially penetrating wells, Water Services , March, p. 174-178.

Chakrabarty and Enachescu, (1997) Using the Deconvolution Approach for Slug Test Analysis: Theory and Application. Ground Water Vol. 3S, No. S, pp. 797 - 806.

Golder Associates and Geomega, 200Sa. Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup Program, Response Action Plan for the East Side Shoreham Facility, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Golder Associates, 200Sb. Remedial Investigation Report for the East Side Shoreham Facility (VIC Site ID VPS080), Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Gringarten, A.C., Bourdet, D.P., Landel, P.A., Kniazeff, V.J., 1979, Comparison Between Different Skin and Wellbore Storage Type Curves for Early Time Transient Analysis, SPE -Paper 820S, September.

Gringarten, A.C., Scientific Software Intercomp., 1986, Computer-Aided Well Test Analysis, SPE-Paper 14099, March.

Hvorslev, M.J., 19S1, Time lag and soil permeability in ground water observations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterway Experimentation Station, Bulletin 36.

Javandel, I. and Witherspoon, P.A., 1983, Analytical Solution ofa Partially Penetrating Well in a Two-Layer Aquifer, Water Resources Res., Vol. 19, pp. S67-S78.

Kruseman, G.P., de Ridder, N.A, Verweij, J.M., 1992, Analysis and Evaluation of Pumping Test Data, ILRI Publication 47.

Olarewaju, 1.S., and Lee, W.J., Texas A&M University, 1987. A Comprehensive Application of a Composite Reservoir Model to Pressure Transient Analysis, SPE - Paper 1634S, April.

Scientific Software Intercomp Inc. 1994. Petroleum Workbench Well Test Analysis -lnterpret-2 user manual verso I.SA, Houston, Texas.


June 2006

I I

SiteWelllD

no W, IIs

, Well. 'deplh. and, I

TABLE 1 WEll CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION

WASTE RECLAMATION/ROUND HOUSE/SHOPS AREA, OVERBURDEN GROUNDWATER EAST SIDE OF SHOREHAM FACILITY

MINNEAPOLIS, MN

I I

Ground Well TOp of Riser Surface Diameter Screen Material

Elevation Top of Well Screen Bottom of Well Screen

I I

654.95 2 Slalnless I '.41 3. 616.95 808.9

=i.o ~ I 34

fit I 2 I I 1.25 60 795 .• 0

~.o 2 ~ ~:= ~ I ,a" , I

023·6105·006

Geologic Unit of Screened Interval

Oolw,,"

51.

@

Pomplng Tesl Well 855 I 4 I Slalnless Sleel I · 70 I 785 90 765 I 51. Pele, I I I

" .ep I

Ground Well SiteWelllD Surface Diameter

[ftmsl] [Inches]

lin I,IIs .00 2

.00 2

.00

853.90 2

854.60 2

2 654.01 2

853.92 2

'Well. 'deplh. and I I ,a,e; I Pumping TeSi Well 855 I 6

G:\PROJECTSI023·6105 CPRlEaSI Side Pumplrtg Tests\Work Plan\ TABLES .• ls

Top of Riser Geologic Unit of

Screen Material Elevation

Top of Well Screen Bottom of Well Screen Screened Interval

[ft] , [deplh bgs] I [ft msl] [ftmsl]

51,.'ess: I 186 668.00 196 ,"lwas I I

Slalnl,ss 187 667.00 197 657.00 ,lwas I I 759.00 10 I I less leel '6.65 633.90 813.90 OPD I I

~ iI~ I I less I ,5.94 184 670.60 Oulw"h I I I I I I · 176 678.01 10

I less "ee 1.92 41 812.92 rdl

I SIalnless Sleel I · 155 I 700 195 660 I Oulwash

Golder Associates Page 1

June 2006

TABLE 2 ANALYTICAL TESTING PROGRAfJ

WASTE REClAMATIONIROUND HOUSEISHOPS AREA, OVERBURDEN GROUNDWATER EAST SIDE OF SHOREHAM FACILITY

MINNEAPOLIS, MN

:

i 'umoi"g esll I Well 1

1

, Testln. pumping Test Well

~ I

Pumping Tes1 Well (sample port) 4

as "e.ded_~~or

Holding Tank to discharge.

minimum 1 per tank

I Post ·estir .g 'ump ing Test Well 1 'ump ing Testl I Well

T Deep est: No. Sam les

Well Installation

PumoinQ Test Well 1

MW04-30-BR 1

Step·Drawdown Testing

Pumping Test Well 1

1


Pumpi"9 Test Well (sample port) 4 as needed prior

Holding Tank to discharge.

minimum 1 per tank

Post Testina

Pumping Test Well 1

Pumoino Test Monilorina Well 1

MW04-30-BR 1

Notos

VOC: Analysis by fixed laboratory using EPA SW-646 method 6260.

CVOC (field):

Volatile Organic Halides

Sampliog Parameters:

Temperature

pH

Oxidation-Reduction PotenUal (ORP)

Turbidity

Conductivity

Dissolved O~ygen (DO)

I

cvoe (Field) cvoe (Field)

MGEg,;'~~~i:~'y1es

voe

CVOC (Field)

voe voe voe

Anal ses

evoe (Field)

evoe (Field)

MCES Permit analytes

evoe (Field)

voe

evoe (Field)

voe voe voe

MCES pem1it aoalytes: pH. cadmium, chromium, COPPef', cyanide, lead, meraJlY. nickel. zinc. chemical

oxygen demand, tolalsuspended solids, toxic organic compoundl. VOCII wi. be analyzed to lulliN

the toxic organics requirement

G:\PROJECTSI023-6105 CPRlEast Side Pumping Tests\Wor1<. Planl TABLES.xls Golder Associates

023·6105-006

Page 2

5804·103

5804 ·99

-$-

5804·15

-$-

-$-

/ <."' ~ 'n -$-5803-40

MW04-21-T &.

AREAC ROUND HO SE

~SB04.66 5BOO-24

-$-5804106

5800·23

-$-

5604-96

/ /

/ ~

SBOO·J6

-$-5804-17 --$-

5804-63

-$- @ OBSERVATiONWELl

6 MW04·9!)..T -$-S804-105

5804 -'3 S803-37

--------~ ---5804-104

MW04·31·T

-~ MW04-31 -0PD MW04-31-SP ----

DISCHARGE LOCATION

o o

o

5 600-27 -$-

-$- -$-SBOO~26 5Boo-25

(

/

S802-S7

l I

4 r~33

MW04-29-T

MW04-29-BR £

-$~

-$-

5804.85 -$- 5BOO-138

SBOO~30 -$- SB04~83 ,t L _____ 'SIBOO~1,ftH

5800-29 -$-6 MWQ4·25-T

5804 -93 -$-

5804-118 -$ SB02-58F

~~58G r·*· MW04·26-BR

S802-59

-$-5604·05

SB04 ·92c . 5804-92

5804-92a SB04-92b

5804-70 -$-

AREAE -WVAS1-E RECLAMATION

AREA

5804-73

-$-

5804-56

5804-72

-$-

MW02-01-OPD MW00-43-T

MWOO-43-SR

-$-

5804-21 -$-

o o o

o

LEGEND

o

&. MW-4040

@

REFERENCES

FACILITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD TRACKS

ROAD

DRIVEWAY

TRAIL

DRAIN OR SHORELINE

FENCE

WALL

SIDEWALK

FOUNDATION OR SLAB

WOODS OUTLINE

TREE

SOIL BORING

MONITORING WELL

PROPOSED WELL

1.) BASE MAP NORTH OF 27th AVENUE NE FROM DIGITAl CAD FILE NEW_BASE_ 2_ 2001 .dwg, TITLED "PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 2 & 11 T29N,

W R24W HENNEPIN CO., MNM

, PROVIDED BY AMEC EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL, > INC. ROADS SOUTH OF 27TH AVENUE NE PROVIDED BY AMEC EARTH AND « ,~>t-1-~ ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

2.) TOPOGRAPHY BY PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN ON APRIL 4, 2000. HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD 83 VERTICAL DATUM IS NAVD 88. GRID SHOWN AT A 500 FOOT INTERVAl.

3.) PROPERTY LINE AND ROW FROM DIGITAL CAD FILE NEW_BASE_ 8_ 00-propedy line.dwg PROVIDED BY AMEC EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

4.) EAST SIDE SHOREHAM SITE AREAS A THROUGH F FROM FIGURE 2, MAREA AND LEAKSITE LOCATION MAP", STATUS OF RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS REPORT, EAST SIDE SHOREHAM FACIUTY, AMEC EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. APRIL 2004. AREA G, PROPOSED IN THAT REPORT, IS MODIFIED AND INCLUDED HERE. AREA A SUBOMDED AS SHOWN IN FIGURE 2-1 OF PHASE II SUPPLEMENTAL REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT, IT CORPORATION, MAY 2001. NOTE THAT THE AREA BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE ONLY, ARE SHOWN FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY, AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT AN INTERPRETATION OF THE EXTENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OR KNOWN CONTAMINATION.

5.) LOCATION OF WELLS PROVIDED BY AMEC EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.

6.) SOIL BORINGS (SB06 - 01 THROUGH SB06-12) TAKEN FROM EXCEL FILE SOIL BORINGS 04172006.XLS, PROVIDED BY SUNDE LAND SURVEYING, l.l.C.

70 i SCALE

o 70 i

FEET

SOO LINE SHOREHAM FACILITY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

SOUTHEAST PUMPING TEST WELLS

A ~4-28-1

MW04-28-' PROJECTED 3D It. NW

ROUND HOUSE I PROJECTED 16 It. NW MW04-28-0PD W~----------------~~~------------~

z o ~ ~ w

900-

700

650

PROPOSED SHALLOW PUMPING WELL

PROJECTED 2 It. S ;::M,::.WO~4:,.-~9~5-,-T:".,..._,.. PROJECTED 54 ft . S

·

·

· · · · . . ..

· · .

· .

--:- .

· ,

· . ·

.

.

MW04-29-T

PROJECTED 54 It. NW

MW04-29-BR

PROJECTED 54 It. NW

PROPOSED OBSERVATION WELL

PROJECTED 60 ft. S

I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ITT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

PROJECTED 22 ft . NW MW04-30-BR

PROJECTED 4 It. NE

PROPOSED DEEP PUMPING WELL

PROJECTED 25 It. N

I AT'1e. I .HI ' I I ARrl ""' dPD T

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I r I I

STRATIGRAPHIC LABELS ffiGEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'

" FILL

I .' ,.' : .: .. :,.'.' , , • . :. Pr, . ,,, .... -~~- ALLUVIUM

k . .:; " .:' .. T', ......... ..:... ,f--- GLACIAL TILL

g~~~I~~ :fl2~' -'~'~ ~"E ~:~. ~· ~i~··::i·t= GLACIO-LACUSTRINE CLAY

. ~,;"~~>'': ST PETER SANDSTONE n"p

(SANDSTONE AND OUTWASH DEPOSITS MUDSTONE MEMBERS) ~ (REWORKED SANDSTONE)

t:l:E "" '''~~'nt:I:::r~I~I--- PRAIRIE DU CHIEN

LEGEND NOTES

MWOO-45-T - .. --- WELL IDENTIFICATION

,l,-.. __ -- TOP OF BOREHOLE

I-f----- SCREEN INTERVAL

I I I I

I I I I I

I I I I I

I I I I

MW02-01-0PD

PROJECTED 29 It. N

'''''00 ., T

PROJECTED 35 It. N

nM

PROJECTED 43 ft. N

A' E r 900

CENTRAL AVENUE

I .. .. I

, ? .

I- 800

l- 750

I- 700

I I I I I I I- 650 I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I 1 T I I I I

I T T " I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I - 600

~ ...J V1

'" I t ~

z 0

~ (;j ...J W

Well Installation & Development

Well Survey

DEEP PUMPING TEST

Step·Orawdown Testing

Step·Orawdown Data Evaluation I Lab Results


Recovery

SHALLOW PUMPING TEST

Step·Orawdown Testing

Step·Drawdown Data Evaluation I Lab Results


Recovery

GWSAMPLING

Groundwater Sampling

Lab Analyses

REPORTING

Analyze Data

Prepare Technical Memo

Submit Memo to MPCA

Cherry HIli, NJ & Minneapolis, MN offices

9 days Tue 5/30/06 Fri 6/9/06

1 day Fri 6/9/06 Fri 6/9/06

8 days Thu 7/6/06 Man 7/17/06

1 day Thu 7/6106 Thu 7/6/06

2 days Fri 717/06 Mon 7/10/06

4 days Mon 7/10/06 Thu 7/13/06

2 days Fri 7/14/06 Mon 7/17/06

8 days Thu 7/20/06 Man 7/31106

1 day Thu 7/20/06 Thu 7/20/06

2 days Fri 7/21/06 Mon 7/24/06

4 days Mon 7/24/06 Thu 7/27/06

2 days Fri 7/28/06 Mon 7/3 1106

21 days Tue 8/1/06 Tue 8/29/06

1 day Tue 811/06 Tue 811 /06

20 days Wed 812106 Tue 8/29/06

35 days Wed 8/2106 Wed 9/20/06

5 days Wed 812106 Tue 8/8/06

30 days Wed 8/9/06 Wed 9/20/06

o days Wed 9/20/06 Wed 9/20/06

Ilns~allation & Development

I-,:SteiP-O,rav,do,wn Testing

,Step:,o".w,jO'vn Data Evaluation I Lab Results

, Cc,"sllant Rate Testing

1-,:>teIP-ora.,down Testing

.",St"p~ID"'wdlo"'n Data Evalua on I

."Co"st,.ntRate Testing

~ •• I]Anal~,e Data

Results

, PI'epare Technical

Figure 3 East Side Pumping Test Schedule

ApPENDIX A

VISUAL SYNTHESIS APPROACH FOR TRANSIENT TEST DATA ANALYSIS (PAPER PRESENTED AT THE 2004 FRACTURED ROCK CONFERENCE

NGW A AND EPA, 2004)

A New Visual Synthesis Tool for Transient Test Data

Cristian Enachescu, Golder Associates; Bernd Frieg, NAGRA; John Wozniewicz, Golder Associates

Abstract

The introduction of the semi-log derivative in the 1980's (Boudet et aI., 1983) reduced the inherent nonuniqueness in flow model selection and represents a significant advancement in the analysis of transient well test data. A new derivative normalization method is presented here for displaying transient data that both compliment and assist traditional type curve analysis. The semi-log derivative data is normalized with regard to the controlling inner boundary condition and translated to units of radial flow equivalent transmissivity. The result is a Transmissivity Normalized Plot (TNP) that displays transmissivity versus time in log-log scale. For the case when the test displays infinite acting radial flow (flat derivative), the transmissivity can be derived from the y-axis coordinate of the flat portion of the derivative displayed on the TNP. The basis for the visual evaluation of transmissivity is that during infinite acting radial flow the semi-log derivative has a slope of zero (Le. is flat) and its vertical position in log-log coordinates is an inverse reflection of the transmissivity (Mattar, 1997). In the evaluation of transient data from multiple wells, the lNP is a useful visual tool for evaluating similar formation responses in terms of flow model (comparison of the shape and slopes of the semi-log derivative data) and magnitude of transmissivity (relative vertical shift). Normalized semi-log derivatives that converge in late time indicate that the different tests Ilsee" the same large scale transmissivity and flow model. Several examples are presented that span a range of geological settings and hydraulic properties. In summary, the direct visual evaluation of the transient data on a single plot is useful synthesis tool that can be integrated with data from other disciplines in the development of a self-consistent conceptual flow model.

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of the semi-log pressure derivative (Boudet et aI., 1983) plotted in log-log scale together with the pressure change (Figure I) was significant advancement in the analysis of constant rate tests. The advantage of the semi-log derivative data is that it is able to display separate characteristics and thus help identify different flow regimes that govern the transient pressure response. The use of the semi-log derivative as a diagnostic tool is summarized below.

• Slopes are used to identify flow regimes. For example: a} a positive unit slope denotes a closed system (no-flow boundary), b) a positive half slope infers linear flow c) a fl at derivative (slope of zero) indicates radial flow, d} a negative half slope is consistent with spherical flow and e} a negative unit slope indicates a constant pressure boundary.

• The vertical position of the semi-log derivative during infinite acting radial flow period is used to determine transmissivity.

• Humps in the semi-log derivative are used to identify phase segregation effects in borehole or changes in storativity away from the wellbore: a} downward humps in the derivative reflect an increase in storativity (e.g. dual porosity model) and b) upward humps reflect a decrease in storativity.

173

Figure 1: Diagnosis of Formation Response using the Semi-Log Derivative Data

104r------.,-~--_.------~--~--_r----~------__,

103

102

. .

semi-log

derivative

Formation

Response

Elapsed Time [hours]

Boundary

103

-a CD (f) (f) c:: CD () ::r III ::J

<0 CD III ::J a. 0 CD :::I. < III ..... ~ .

~

A -a 2::

Based on the diagnostic features described above, the transient response in Figure 1 can be described as follows:

• During early times (elapsed time (t) < 2E-2 hours) a closed system behavior is indicated by the unit slope which is consistent with the well bore storage period.

• The trans ition period (2E-2 hours < t < 3 hours) rellects the near well bore properties and shows a decrease of storage capacity (from the wellbore storage dominated system to the formation storativity dominated system) and possibly a zone of lower transmissivity around the borehole (also known as positive skin).

• At middle times (3 hours < t < 70 hours) the semi-log derivative is Ilat, indicating radial flow geometry. This is the portion o f the test data that is used to derive the formation transmissivity.

• At late times (t > 70 hours) the derivative shows a downward unit slope, indicating the presence of a constant pressure boundary, which could also be described as an increase of transmissivity by at least one order of magnitude.

A new nonnalization technique is presented here to display both the pressure change and semi-log derivative in log-log scale. This new visual tool, referred to as Transmissivity Nonnalized Plot (TNP), compliment and assist traditional type curve analysis by providing:

• A visual confinnation of the transmissivity when the infinite acting radial flow (radial flow) assumption is satisfied.

• A sensitive diagnostic method to assess changes in near wellbore properties due to turbulent flow, stimulation or c logging.

• A synthesis tool that allows all the transient test data from a given site to be viewed on single plot, regardless of the inner boundary conditions of the test (i.e. test type, source or observation well).

174

The basis for the TNP is that during infinite acting radial flow period the semi-log derivative has a slope of zero (i.e. is flat) and its vertical position in log-log coordinates is an inverse reflection of the transmissivity (Mattar, 1997). The semi-log derivative may also be used for interpretation of slug and pulse data through deconvolution (Peres et. aI., 1989; Chakrabarty and Enachescu, 1997).

A theoretical discussion will be presented along with examples using test data that span a wide range of transmissivity values and geologic settings. Analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel and FlowDim, an in-house analytical program that has been verified in the assessment of nuclear repository programs (NAGRA. 2001).

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Type curve analysis

To understand the TNP it is useful to briefly review the type curve analysis method, as applied to the interpretation of constant rate tests (text adapted from Horne, 1990). Nomenclature is provided in Table 1. The type curve analysis method makes use of dimensionless variables, which allow calculating the flow model (Le. the type curve) independently of the primary fonnation flow parameters (i.e. transmissivity and storativity) and of the applied flow rate. The dimensionless pressure and time groups are defined as:

21fT/';p Po =

qpg

TM IIJ = --,

SrI!'

(1 )

(2)

Since, by definition. dimensionless pressure and time are linear functions of actual pressure and time, then the logarithm of the pressure difference will differ from the logarithm of the dimensionless pressure (i.e. the type curve) by a constant amount.

21fT log,1p = IOgPD - Iog

qpg

similarly

T logM = IOgtD - Iog-,

Srw

(3)

(4)

Hence a log-log graph of LIp vs. LIt will have the same shape to a graph of Po vs. to and the curves will be

21fT T shifted vertically by log-- and horizontally by log--2 . Matching the two curves provides estimates of

qpg Sr" Transmissivity (T) and Storativity (S).

175

Table 1: Nomenclature

C - Well bore storage coefficient [m'/Pa] to - Dimensionless Time [-] T ~ Transmissivity [m'/s] PD = Dimensionless Pressure [-] q ~ Flow rate [mJ/s] QD ~ Dimensionless Flow Rate [-] I1p ~ Change in pressure [Pal

p" ~ Deconvolved pressure (slug tests) [s]

P, ~ Initial pressure (pa] g ~ Gravitational Acceleration [m/s' ]

Pw ~ Bottom hole pressure [Pal

Po ~ Pressure just before a flow period [Pal

q. ~ Water Flow Rate [mJ/s] S = seconds

ql~ ~ Inverse of Flow Rate [mlmJ] 11/ = meter

t ~ Time [s] Pa = Pascal

p ~ Fluid Density [kg/mJ] kg = kilogram I :::: litre

The Transmissivity Normalized Plot (TNP)

In general terms, the transformation of a log-log derivative plot to a 1NP involves solving Equation 1 for transmissivity, thus transforming the semi-log derivative data (dp/d(log (I) to transmissivity units. The discussion presented above has been limited to constant rate tests and the concept is discussed below for all test types.

The process involves (I) the construction of the log-log derivative plot of the respective test and (2) the transmissivity transfonllation of the semi-log derivative data. Table 2 presents the data processing equations (construction of the log-log plot) for each of the individual test types as well as the dimensionless pressure equations (also called transmissivity transformation equations) used for the transmissivity transformation of the semi-log derivative data.

An inspection of the transmissivity transformation equations used for the individual test types shows that the semi-log derivative is normalized by the parameter which controls the inner boundary condition of the respective test type:

• Well bore storage (C) for slug and pulse tests; • Flow rate (q) for constant rate tests; and • Pressure difference (iJp) for constant pressure tests.

Table 2:Summary of Normal ization Analysis

Transmissivity Transformation Test Type Data Processing Equation ,

Slug/Puise Tests (Chakrabarty f(p, - P.(,»)1, p,, (' ) C pg P/)(l/))

and Enachescu, 1997) P,,('l-'( () ) [,I 2HT Po. f Po

Constant Rate Tests (Home, tJ.p(t) ~ P. (t) - po[Pa] 6p(,)_ qp gPD(to) 1990) 2HT

Constant Pressure Tests (Jacob q,~ (') ~ q.~/) [II:' ] q~V) 6ppg

and Lohman, 1952) 27rTQD(' D)

176

In the following, the solution of the transmissivity transformation equations (TIE) is presented. The equations presented below assume single phase flow of a slightly-compressible fluid with constant compressibility and constant viscosity. [n addition, static conditions are assumed at the start of the test or pre-test transient effects are accounted for in the interpretation.

The solution of the TTEs is based on the fact that for the case of infinite acting radial flow (lARF) the semi log derivative of the flow model (Pv(tv) or Qv(lo) converges to the constant value of 0.5 at middle and late times (10 ) I E-2 for constant rate tests and Iv > I E-I for slug tests and constant pressure tests):

0.5 (5)

0.5 (6)

In this case, the TIEs in Table 1 can be rewritten for the semilog derivative as:

C dPf)~D) dpl'II(t)

pg dlogtD

dlogt 21fT for slug/pulse tests (7)

dp') ~f) ) dl!.p(t)

qpg dlogtf)

dlogt 21fT for constant rate tests (8)

dq,,,,(t) I!.p pg

dlogt 21fT dQDVDJ for constant pressure tests (9)

dlogtD

By replacing the infinite acting radial flow (IARF) assumption stated in equations 5 and 6 into equations 7, 8 and 9, these can be solved for transmissivity (T1ARF). as presented for the example of a constant rate test, in equation 10:

T = dlogt q pg IARF dl!.p~) 41f

(10)

Using equations of the type of equation 10, the semi-log derivative data of any test phase can be normalized and expressed in terms of transmissivity units. In this way, for any point on the derivative curve that fulfills the infinite acting radial flow (IARF) assumption (flat shape of the derivative), the format ion transmissivity is equal to the V-coordinate of this point in a Twu,' vs. time plot. The method is applicable for both source and observation borehole data. This way this nomlali zation process allows for a direct comparison of the flow model and transmissivity, regardless of the test type.

If the infinite acting radial flow assumption is not satisfied, the radial flow equivalent transm issivity 011 the yaxis does not apply. However, in the synthesis of multiple test data, the TNP provides a direct comparison of the relative transmissivity as the vertical position is inversely proportional to the transmissivity. Ln tenn of flow models, the plots allow a direct comparison of multiple well data by evaluating for the consistency of the slopes and shapes orthe semi-log derivative data.

177

EXAMPLES FOR TRANSMISSIVITY NORMALIZED PLOTS

This section presents fives examples for the application of TNP. The examples progress from single well test data, relatively small scale to synthesis of multiple test zone data, relatively large scale.

Single Test Example (Example I)

TNP are useful to visually confirm the transmissivity when the infinite acting radial flow period assumption is satisfied. Figures 2A and 2B compare the traditional analysis of a slug test using type curve matching and a TNP. In both plots, the pressure change is the upper data set and the semi-log derivative data is the lower data set.

Figure 2A: Analysis of Slug Test using Deconvolution Method (Example I) f _ V ...... '.'Ob

Elapsed TIITl3 [hour] «)G-. ..... ""Io! ..

10' ,IT' ,IT' 10,1 "P 10'

'0' pr= .. e cha'>ge

~ , ~ ,CP ~ :," -:.;~ iii ,iP ~ sem-Iog deriva~Ye data .~ ~

" 0. ' ,IT' ,.'

0.03

,CP 10' 10' 10' ,<I' Dimensionless TIme

FlOW~L .- Co 5.41( .Q! -. ~RYcot01"CINS; Skqpol .. r. U lIlE.Q! .~

WEll. lYPE ,S"""'. S_ a.m.(llj Slf'ERPOSIlION lY"" , ~ __ lib> s. 0._ ' 00 PLOTTY"" · P_.Rojonoido no 1._+(10

Figure 2B: Transmissivity Normalized Plot of the Slug Test (Example I)

' .00 1.0E-l0

11.0£ .09 ., .• i ~

10.00

C c

EI. pled Time [s econdl )

100.00

"'" oooOr

%1 c C

"l! 1.0E.o8 r --------~'-----_:_--'--"' .. .=_..= ... '")~P .. 1

• . . '" ~ ~\ , 6 6, W 'It! • ' 06 1&

• .if

~ 11.oEo 01

IDl lugtelt- p,,,,uf1Ichange I 6 I llig tn l- oem-log d . rl~afi~e data

1000.00

1.0E--06 L __________________________ J

• ~ • ~ ~

i ~ 8 ~

178

The leveling off of the semi-log derivative data indicates that the infinite acting radial flow assumption is satisfied and the estimated transmissivity is the V-coordinate for any point during the radial flow period. Visual examination of the TNP (Figure 2B) shows that the transmissivity is approximately IE-08 m'ls, confirming the type curve analysis (Figure 2A). The uncertainty is primarily attributed to noise in the semi-log derivative data versus a change in transmissivity away from the well. In cases that significant non-ideal noise masks the formation response, the approach is to select a homogeneous formation model with the infinite acting radial flow period matched to median of the scatter in the semi-log derivative data.

Evaluation a/Changing Near WeI/bore Properties Within a Given Test Interval (Example 2)

A very useful application of the TNP is for evaluation of changes in near well bore properties in a given zone due to stimulation, clogging or turbulent flow. The normalized plot provides a direct comparison of the evolution of formation response through time.

The second example shows multiple pumping test data perfonned in subsequent phases for a given interval (Figure 3). The size of the early time "hump" in the semi-log derivative data. and the separation between the pressure change (upper data set) and semi-log pressure derivative (lower data set). provide indication for the magnitude of the near wellbore transmissivity. This example shows that with each subsequent test the "hump" reduces in size. along with separation between the pressure change and the derivative data, indicating an increase in near wellbore transmissivity between tests. The local increase in transmissivity is attributed to removal of drilling mud and fine-grained sediment as additional fluid is produced from the formation . Here. the TNP provides a high resolution tool to evaluate changes in near well bore properties that is easily distinguishable from the undisturbed fomation response. The transmissivity derived from all tests for the undisturbed formation , as indicated by the leveling off of the semi-log derivative data (Figure 3), shows good consistency at approximately 8E-04 m'/s.

10 ..

~ N

.§.

f 1O , ·iii " ·e " ~ .. ~ -~ oS! 10. ~ . :; .,. W

~ 0 u: Oi '6 10., .. II:

Figure 3: Transmissivity Normalized Plot for Multiple Pumping Test Data in a Given Interval (Example 2)

'" Phase 1

0 Phase 2

0 Phase 3

. ~

• •

0

0

.' ~ • ~ oO

• 0

0

increase in local transmissivity decrease in size of the "hump"

o

10., '--_____ --1 _____ -"--L __ ~ ___ _'_ __ _'

104 10., 10., 10.,

Elapsed Time [hours)

179

Comparison of Formation Responses from Different Test Types With Different Scale of Influences, Within a Given Test Interval (Example 3)

The third example displays only the semi· log derivative data for a slug and constant rate test from a given interval (Figure 4). Typically, the data base for a given site will contain more slug test data compared to constant rate tests due to less expense and minimal equipment requirements for slug tests. The TNP may be used to directly compare the numerous slug tests with the few constant rate tests that typically have a larger radius of influence due to a longer duration. For simplicity here, a single slug test with a radius of influence of 10's of meters is compared to a single constant rate phase with a radius of influence of 100's of meters. Radius of influence was estimated based on the definition in Streltsova (l988). The slug test semi· log derivative data shows a scatter but a general leveling off trend is recognized and equivalent to a transmissivity of 1.0E-06 m2/s. For the constant rate tests, the late time semi-log derivative data shows some undulations that may be interpreted with a variety of models, but is simplified here to a pseudo radial flow period with an equivalent transmissivity of 2.0E-06 m2/s . The lower transmissivity in the slug test may reflect lower transmissivity in the near wellbore disturbed zone.

Figure 4: Transmissivity Normalized Plot (semi· log derivative data only) Comparing a Slug Test to a Constant Rate Test, Performed in the Same Interval (Example 3)

Elapsed Time (seconds]

1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100000 1.0E-07 ,~~~~~~-~~_~~-_~~~~~-_~_~~-___ ~..",

i ·f 1.0E-06

J ~ ~ ·S ol[

~ 1.0E-05 Ii: .. ~

x

•

•

x

• • ••

•

• Slug Test - semi-log derivative data

x Constant Rate Test - semi-log derivative data

1.0E-04 L ______________________________ -.J

Comparison of Formation Responseji-om Multiple Zones (Examples 4 and 5)

TNP provide a useful synthesis tool for a given site that allows viewing the formation responses ITom multiple zones on a single plot. Nonnalized semi-log derivatives that converge in late time indicate that the different tests see the same large scale transmissivity and flow model. Examples four and five illust rate the use of1NP to compare pumping and obsetvation well data for a given test.

The test data for example four was collected to support the Sound Science Initiative for the protection of the Upper Floridan Aquifer and was funded by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division. The tests were performed in the Upper and Lower Brunswick aquifers, as an alternative groundwater supply, that consist of poorly sorted, fine to coarse, slightly phosphatic and dolomitic quartz sand and sandy limestone. Figure 5 shows the pumping and obsetvation well semi· log derivative data on a TNP. Inconsistencies in early time data

180

are primarily attributed to a larger wellbore storage and skin effect in the pumping well. The formation response shows a consistent leveling off of the semi-log derivative data that translates to a transmissivity of lAE-05 m2/s. As the pumping and observation wells have different spatial coverage, the consistent response suggests a relatively homogeneous system over the scale of the test.

Figure 5: Transmissivity Normalized Plot (semi-log derivative data only) for a Pumping and Observation Well Response during a Constant Rate Test (Example 4)

100 1000

Elapsed Tfme [seconds}

10000 100000 1000000

1.0E-06 r-------~~------~~-------~~------~~

x

x x

• Pumping Data - semi-log derivative data

X Observat ion Well - semi-log derivative data

1.0E-03 '-------------------------------------'

The data for the final example was collected in Switzerland at the NAGRA underground laboratory (Grimsel Test Site) located in the Aar massif (Swiss Alpes), as part of the Hyperalkaline Plume in Fractured Rock Experiment (HPF), and is funded by NAGRA (CH), ANORA (FR), JNC (JP) and SKB (SE) (see www.grimsel.com for further details). Tn this experiment the interaction of cement pore waters and cement leachates, which are known to be highly alkaline, with the repository rock of radioactive waste disposal sites has been investigated. This interaction could significantly alter the original nature of the host foonation, affecting the retardation qualities for which the formation was originally chosen, by changing the pre-existing geochemical and hydrological conditions. From a safety assessment point of view, the extent of such an alteration zone (often called the "hyperalkaline plume") and the consequent changes of radio nuclide retardation properties of the formation must be carefully assessed.

Three hydraulic testing campaigns (1998, 2000 and 2002) were conducted with the aim of characterizing the change in hydraulic parameters of a shear zone due to the high pH environment induced by long term injection of hyper-alkaline fluid in a dipole configuration. Comparison of transmissivity obtained from hydraulic interference tests conducted before and after high pH fluid injection allows to document potential changes in the hydraulic properties of the test site. Besides the classical analysis, the TNP presented here (Figure 6) provided the experiment with important additional information regarding the observed transmissivity changes and the derived flow models in the high pH flow field.

181

Figure 6: Transmissivity Normalized Plot (semi-log derivative data only) for Injection and Observation Wells for Tests Before and After Injection of High PH Fluid (Example 5)

8apsed Time Is] 1.&01 1.800 1.E+01 1.&02 1.&03 1."'" 1.E+05 1.&05

1.&11 r.-;:::==":===:r::==:::77,~7jf-;'-T771r;,7l;r;-7/r;7}

1.&10 7

"til" 1.E-09

~ ~ .. • .• ~ $ ~ 1.E-08

~ ~ ~ .. • •• & w 1.E-07

1.E-<l6

• •

'I r OO t ."

1.E-05 , -.1'-1- 1-''-/-,'-1+'1-- -1-- 1

•

The individual test intervals isolate a shear zone within the granitic matrix. Figure 6 shows as an example the derivative responses of one of the injection boreholes (Borehole 01) together with two observation boreholes (02 and 08) measured before the injection of the high pH fluid (year 2000 plotted as full dots) and after the injection of the high pH fluid (year 2002 plotted as empty dots). The derivative responses show relatively complex flow behaviour with several changes in transmissivity with distance from the injection borehole. A detailed interpretation of the flow model is beyond the scope of this paper. However, a comparison of the derivatives measured in the source borehole (0 I) reveals a decrease of transmissivity of at least one order of magnitude (shift up in the data) in a zone ofapprox. 2 m radius around borehole Ot as a result of the high pH fluid injection. Further away the effect is less pronounced but a transmissivity decrease can still be identified. A comparison of the responses measured in the observation boreholes shows that the transmissivity decreases by different magnitudes along different flow paths. The response recorded in observation borehole 02 indicates a transmissivity decrease by a factor of 4 (approx. from 7E-10 m'Js to 3E-9 m'Js) while the response recorded in borehole 08 indicates a transmissivity decrease by a factor of 2.

182

The transmissivity changes due to injection of high pH fluid into the shear zone were characterized by involving 58 test responses into the TNP analysis. As a resu lt, a differentiated picture could be derived. The results of the TNP analysis were consistent with the findings of dipole tracer tests conducted in the shear zone.

This example shows some of the complexity involved in deriving a conceptual model based on analyses of individual zones in a fractured rock sett ing. Parameters from individual analyses are typically presented without a scale which results in inconsistencies between tests. In addition, often the resolution of type curve analys is is not sufficient to detect changes in formation response on the order of several factors due inherent ambiguities from scale dependency and non-uniqueness due to parameter correlation, flow model selection and flow geometry assumption.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The development of a robust self-consistent conceptual flow model for a site is an important step in the aquifer characteri zation process. The flow model of choice should be consistent with all the available data including the geological. geophysical, geochemical and transient test data. Within each discipline, a synthesis process is performed so the data may be viewed upon as whole for consistencies and trends.

The synthesis of hydraul ic test data is an important part of the conceptual flow model development as the main discipline to describe the perfonnance of the aquifer under dynamic flow conditions. Synthesis of parameters alone involves complications due to scale dependency and non-uniqueness due to parameter correlation. flow model selection and flow geometry assumption.

TNP provide a useful visual synthesis tool for transient hydraulic test data that can improve the uniqueness in the development of the site conceptual flow model. This paper presented the theoretical basis for displaying test data with different boundary conditions (slug, pulse, constant rate and constant head) on a single plot. Tn addition, transmissivity can be detennined from visual evaluation of the nonnalized sem i-log derivative data if the infinite acting radial flow assumption is satisfied. For the case the assumption is invalid, the TNP is useful for evaluat ing degree of consistency of the format ion response in tenns of flow model (comparison of shape and slopes of the semi-log derivative data) and magnitUde of transmissivity (relative vertical sh ift) . Normalized semi-log derivatives that converge in late time indicate that the different tests "see" the same large scale transmissivity and flow model. In summary, the direct visual evaluation of the transient data on a single plot is useful synthesis tool that can be integrated with data from other disciplines in the development of a selfconsistent conceptual flow model.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank NAGRA for their continued support in the development of transient analys is methods. Also. the authors would like to thank the Georgia Environmental Protection Division for permission to present data that was collected in support of the Sound Science Initiative for the protection of the Upper Floridan Aquifer.

183

REFERENCES

Bourdet. D., Whittle T. M., Douglas, A. A & Pirard, Y. M. (1983b): A New Set Of Type Curves Simplifies Well Test Analysis. -World Oi15, 95-106.

Chakrabarty, C. And C. Enachescu. 1997. Using The Deconvolution Approach For Slug Test Analysis: Theory And Application. Ground Water V. 35 (5): Pp. 797-806.

Earlougher, R. C, Jr. 1977. Advances In Well Test Analysis". Society Of Petroleum Engineers Monograph 5, Dallas, Tx.

Jacob, CE. And S.W. Lohman, 1952. Nonsteady Flow To A Well Of Constant Drawdown In An Extensive Aquifer. American Geophysical Uniontransaclions, Volume 33, Pp. 559-569.

Home, R.N. (1990): Modem Well Test Analysis- A Computer Aided Approach. -I Edit. , Petroway Inc., 185 S.

Mal1ar, L. (1997). Derivative Analysis Without Type Curves. 480. Annual Meeting of the Petroleum Society, Calgary, Alberta, June8-11 , 1997

Nagra (2001): Sondierbohrungen Benken, Untersuchungsberieht. - Nagra Technical Report, NTB 00-01, 200 1 August; Nagra(Wel1ingen).

Peres, AM.M ., Ollor, M., & Reynolds, AC (1989): A New Analysis Procedure For Determining Aquifer Properties From Slug Test Data. - Water Resources Research Vo1.25. No. 7, pp. 1591-1602.

Streltsova,1'. D., (1988): Well Testing In Heterogeneous Formations - An Exxon Monograph, 413 P.

Biographical Sketches

Chl'istian Enachescu is an Associate at Golder Associates GmbH, currently located in Germany. He is responsible for hydraulic testing and currently the leader of the In Situ Solutions group. His expertise includes hydraulic characterization of heterogeneous formations with special emphasis on low permeability formations. Mr. Enachescu holds a Geology degree from the Hanover University, Germany.

Golder Associates GmbH; Vorbruch 3, 0-29227, Celie, Germany; T [49] (5141) 98960; F [49] (5141) 989696; [email protected]

Bernd Frieg is project manager for geosciences at the National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Nagra) in Switzerland. He is responsible for various site investigation programmes and especially for the hydraulic characterisation programmes with special emphasis on the various low permeability host rocks like marl, crystalline, clay and anhydrite. Besides that he is responsible and guiding scientific international research projects in Nagra's underground rock laboratories. Mr. Frieg holds a Geology diploma with PhD from University of Heidelberg, Germany.

NAGRA, The Swiss National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste; Hardstrasse 73, 5430 Wettingen Switzerland; T [41] (0) 56 4371272; F [41] (0) 56 4371317; [email protected].

John Wozniewicz is a Senior Project Manager at Golder Associates Inc. and a member of the In Situ Solutions Group, currently located in Calgary, Alberta. His experience has focused on pressure transient analysis using analytical tools in characterizing heterogeneous formations for the nuclear, mining and oil /gas industries. Mr. Wozniewicz received a MSc. from Eastern Washington University.

Golder Associates LTD; 1000, 940-6'" Avenue S.W., Calgary T [I] 403 299-5600; F [1] 403-299-5606; ..,io",h!!!n_w=oz"-n!!lie,-,w!!i",cz"!@~g",o",ld",e",r.",co",ml! '

Alberta, Canada, T2P 3Tl;

184

1111111111111111111111111111111 dsooo

Documents