groundwater monitoring & additional investigation report …

GROUNDWATER MONITORING & ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

FANNY ALLEN CONVENT

786 COLLEGE PARKWAY (ROUTE 15) COLCHESTER, VERMONT

Prepared for:

Religious Hospitallers of St. Joseph 47 W. Spring Street

Winooski, VT 05404-1319 Contact: Sister Adrienne Desjardins

VT SMS Site #2006-3534

November 14, 2006

Prepared by:

LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.

Professional Ground-Water & Environmental Engineering Services 72 Helena Drive, Suite 140

Williston, VT 05495

CONNECTICUT LOUISIANA OHIO ILLINOIS SOUTH DAKOTA PENNSYLVANIA FLORIDA NEW JERSEY MINNESOTA TEXAS WISCONSIN NEW YORK MISSOURI VERMONT

LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC. i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………..... ........1 1.0 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND..........................................................................2 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK..........................................................................................................2 2.1 Additional Subsurface Investigation....................................................................2 2.2 Groundwater Monitoring .....................................................................................3 2.3 Reporting..............................................................................................................33.0 ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION......................................................3 3.1 Advancement of Soil Borings/Monitor Wells .....................................................3 3.2 Site Geology.........................................................................................................4 3.3 Site Survey...........................................................................................................4 4.0 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING.....................................................................................4 4.1 Groundwater Elevations and Flow Direction ......................................................4 4.2 Groundwater Sample Collection..........................................................................5 5.0 RECEPTOR SURVEY ....................................................................................................5 6.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS .............................................................................................5 6.1 Groundwater Samples..........................................................................................5 6.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control......................................................................6 7.0 FINDINGS.......................................................................................................................6 8.0 CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................6 9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................7 Figures

1 Site Location 2 Site Plan 3 Groundwater Contour Map

Tables

1 Groundwater Table Elevations 2 Groundwater Analytical Results

Appendices

1 Geologic Logs 2 Laboratory Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. (LBG) has conducted an additional investigation and a round of groundwater quality testing at the Fanny Allen Convent at 786 College Parkway in Colchester, Vermont (the site). October 2006 field investigation included the advancement of three soil borings completed as monitor wells to further assess the degree and extent of groundwater contamination on site previously identified. Groundwater samples were obtained in October 2006 and analyzed from on-site monitoring wells. The screened section of MW-2 is silted in to approximately 13 feet below ground and was not sampled. The groundwater flow direction is to the south and southeast based on groundwater elevations measured in the monitoring wells. Groundwater contamination exceeding the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES) for mercury was detected in MW-3 and in a past sampling event mercury was also detected in MW-4. At this time subsurface contamination appears to be localized around the convent building. It is undetermined how mercury may have been released to impact the groundwater adjacent to the convent building. The property owners may elect to seek a Site Management Activity Complete (SMAC) designation from the VT SMS. Prior to receiving a SMAC designation, all site wells should be properly decommissioned. The SMAC designation will require notification to the land records that the site may contain residual contamination above the VGES. It does not appear that there is impact to any other receptors based on the available data. If a SMAC designation is not acceptable to the property owners, as an alternative, LBG recommends continuing groundwater monitoring of wells MW-3 and MW-4 for mercury on semi-annual basis. Sampling of the remaining site wells should be discontinued and these wells should be properly decommissioned.

Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Fanny Allen\1006 SSI Report.doc 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND LBG has prepared this report to detail the recent environmental work conducted at the site. The Vermont Sites Management Section (SMS) had previously requested this work. The location of the site is depicted on Figure 1, Site Location Map and details of the Site are shown on Figure 2, the Site Plan. The site building, constructed in 1908, has been used as a convent until vacated in December 2004. The site is located at the Fanny Allen Hospital in a mixed residential/commercial area of Colchester and is located on the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series Burlington, Vermont Quadrangle. Adjacent properties include a the Fanny Allen Hospital, St. Michael’s College, residential properties, and a Cumberland Farms convenience store with gasoline dispensers. The property is also abutted by a steep, wooded ravine leading toward the Winooski River. The on-site building is now heated with natural gas and is a three-story, brick veneer structure with a full basement. The facility is served by the Town of Colchester municipal sewer and water. Asphalt parking areas and driveways connect the site to Fanny Allen Hospital. The site is relatively flat; however, the western and southern sides of the property slope steeply down to a wooded ravine leading toward the Winooski River. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted by Clay Point Associates, Inc. in January 2006. The Phase I report recommended an investigation of potential past underground and aboveground heating oil tanks at the convent. A subsurface investigation, including the installation of four temporary monitor wells, was conducted in April 2006, to determine if soil and groundwater had been impacted by former oil storage tanks at the site. Laboratory analysis identified various metals, including arsenic, barium, chromium, lead, and mercury, in the groundwater samples collected that were at concentrations exceeding the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standards (VGES). The State of Vermont Sites Management Section (VT SMS) was notified and the site was placed on the Vermont Hazardous Sites List. As a result of the April investigation, a subsequent subsurface investigation was recommended. The additional work was done to confirm the presence of the metals in the groundwater, to further assess the extent and degree of contamination, and determine groundwater flow direction. The VT SMS also requested that a receptor survey be conducted and reported. The results of this supplemental site investigation and subsequent groundwater sampling event are summarized in this report.

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

2.1 Additional Subsurface Investigation LBG oversaw the advancement of three (3) soil borings using a hollow stem auger drilling rig. Continuous split spoon samples were collected ahead of the auger flights at each boring. Soils were field screened for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using a


photo ionization detector (PID). Split spoon soil samples were collected, field screened and logged. The borings were placed south and west of the initial four wells to completely surround the old footprint of the original hospital building.

A site survey, updating the Site Plan with the new monitoring points, was also conducted. 2.2 Groundwater Monitoring As required by the VT SMS, LBG personnel collected groundwater samples from on-site monitor wells, including a Fanny Allen Hospital monitor well, which were analyzed for VOCs by US EPA Method 8260, RCRA 8 metals and zinc, chemical oxygen demand (COD), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Following the depth to water measurement in each well, low flow purging and sampling occurred. Groundwater was removed from the wells and transferred into the appropriate laboratory preserved and provided glassware. These samples were submitted to GeoLabs, Inc. of Braintree, Massachusetts for analysis. 2.3 Reporting Following the completion of the above mentioned field work and upon receipt of the analytical data, LBG prepared this summary report, including tabulated summaries of data; geologic logs; figures depicting groundwater flow direction; and comparisons of past data to the current data. In addition, the report includes pertinent conclusions and recommendations based on the results obtained.

3.0 ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

Prior to conducting any drilling activities, LBG cleared the site with Dig Safe. 3.1 Advancement of Soil Borings/Monitor Wells LBG contracted with Environmental Drilling, Inc. of South Glens Falls, New York to advance three (3) soil borings using a hollow stem auger drill rig while continuously screening the soils for VOCs using a PID. The HNu Model 101 PID with a 10.2 eV lamp was calibrated to a 100 isobutylene standard referenced to benzene prior to screening. PID readings ranged from less than 0.1 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to 0.2 ppmv. Soil boring depths range from 20 to 22 feet from ground surface. Each soil boring was logged, describing soil strata. Locations are depicted on Figure 2 and the geologic logs are provided in Appendix 1. All three borings were completed as groundwater monitor wells. The wells are constructed of 2-inch diameter schedule 40 PVC with 0.010 slot screen. Each screen was set to straddle the groundwater table encountered during drilling. A sand pack was installed around the well screen at each location. A bentonite seal was place above each sand pack to prevent surface water infiltration. Each well was fitted with a locking expansion plug and well guard.


Following the completion of the wells, each well was developed to remove any material introduced into the well during construction and to hydraulically connect the well with the aquifer. Well locations are summarized in the table below. Well ID Location Depth of

Well (ft) Depth to

Groundwater (ft) MW-201 Southwest of MW-2, southeast of the original

hospital building 20 16.45 MW-202 Southwest of MW-201, south of the original

hospital building 22 20.63 MW-203 Southwest of MW-3 and the original hospital

building 20 15.64 3.2 Site Geology The soils at the site generally consisted of brown, medium and fine sand layers with some stone over fine sand and silt layers. The silt tended to begin at depths ranging from 12 to 14.5 feet below ground surface. Bedrock was not encountered. The locations of the wells and the original hospital building are depicted on Figure 2 and more soil details can be found in Appendix 1. 3.3 Site Survey LBG personnel conducted a site survey using a Topcon Digital Theodolite to update the Site Plan to include new sampling locations.

4.0 GROUNDWATER SAMPLING 4.1 Groundwater Elevations and Flow Direction Depth to groundwater on October 6, 2006 ranged from 4.91 feet to 20.63 feet below the top of well casing in wells FA-2 and MW-202, respectively. FA-2 is located at a lower ground elevation than the other wells. The average groundwater table elevation was 80.91 feet. Based on the data collected, the groundwater flow direction is interpreted to be southerly with a horizontal hydraulic of 0.045 feet per foot and southeasterly with a horizontal hydraulic gradient of 0.023 feet per foot. Figure 3, Groundwater Contour Plan, shows groundwater flow, elevations, and contours. The attached Table 1, Groundwater Table Elevations, further details data collected in the field.


4.2 Groundwater Sample Collection Prior to sample collection, groundwater was purged from the wells in order to obtain a representative groundwater sample using a peristaltic low flow pump and dedicated polyethylene tubing. Once the stabilization of parameters such as temperature, specific conductance, and pH occurred, samples were collected. Purge water was discharged to the ground surface. The groundwater samples were placed in the appropriate laboratory preserved and provided glassware. All samples were analyzed for VOCs by US EPA Method 8260, RCRA 8 metals and zinc, COD, and PAHs by US EPA Method 8270, with the exception of MW-202, which did not contain sufficient water for PAH analysis. MW-2 was silted in and/or caved in, so no samples could be collected. A field blank sample and a duplicate sample (labeled DUP) collected from MW-203, were collected for Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) purposes. These samples were submitted to GeoLabs, Inc. of Braintree, Massachusetts for analysis.

5.0 RECEPTOR SURVEY

LBG personnel walked along the top of the steep embankment of the south and southwest portions of the site. There were no signs of distressed vegetation or staining observed. An active rail line and the Winooski River are located down gradient of the site.

6.0 ANALYTICAL RESULTS 6.1 Groundwater Samples The laboratory data received from GeoLabs, Inc. indicates the mercury concentration detected in one of the seven wells sampled exceeds the Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard (VGES). The results are summarized in Table 2 and the complete laboratory report is provided as Appendix 2. RCRA 8 Metals and Zinc Mercury was detected above the VGES of 2 micrograms per liter (µg/L) in MW-3 at 3.9 µg/L. Mercury was not detected above the method detection limits (MDLs) in any other well sampled. Barium was detected in all wells, except FA-2, below the VGES, but above the MDL at concentrations ranging from 19.1 to 126 µg/L. No other metals were detected above the MDLs. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) COD concentrations were elevated in wells MW-3, MW-201, MW-202, MW-203, and FA-2.


6.2 Quality Assurance / Quality Control All laboratory data has been validated for the following parameters prior to acceptance:

• Correct sample identification; • Correct reporting limits; • Analysis within the method specified holding time; • Acceptable detection limit multipliers; and, • Acceptable surrogate recoveries.

Based on the QA/QC evaluation, the data is acceptable.

7.0 FINDINGS

LBG draws the following findings from the data collected during the October 2006 additional subsurface investigation and monitoring event.

The screened section of well MW-2 is silted in and cannot be used to obtain representative groundwater samples.

The groundwater flow direction is to the south and southeast based on

groundwater elevations measured in the monitoring wells.

Groundwater contamination exceeding the VGES for mercury was detected in MW-3.

8.0 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the October 2006 supplemental subsurface investigation and subsequent groundwater monitoring event, groundwater contamination beneath the site remains contaminated with mercury at concentrations above the VGES. The mercury contamination present in well MW-3 appears to be confined to this area. Mercury was detected in wells MW-3 and MW-4 in April 2006, but was only confirmed in MW-3 in October 2006. Concentrations of arsenic, barium, chromium, and lead previously measured above the VGES were not confirmed in October 2006 and are likely due to the well construction and sampling procedures employed by others. Samples collected by LBG in October 2006 used low flow techniques that minimize disturbance in the well during purging and sampling. The detection of mercury in MW-4 during a past sampling event, may suggest that mercury contamination is localized around the convent building. It is undetermined how mercury may have been released to impact the groundwater adjacent to the convent building. The COD concentrations were slightly elevated in several wells on the site.


9.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The property owners may elect to seek a Site Management Activity Complete (SMAC) designation from the VT SMS. Prior to receiving a SMAC designation, all site wells should be properly decommissioned. The SMAC designation will require notification to the land records that the site may contain residual contamination above the VGES. It does not appear that there is impact to any other receptors based on the available data. If a SMAC designation is not acceptable to the property owners, as an alternative, LBG recommends continuing groundwater monitoring of wells MW-3 and MW-4 for mercury on semi-annual basis. Sampling of the remaining site wells should be discontinued and these wells should be properly decommissioned.



FIGURES

SITE LOCATION MAP

FANNY ALLEN HOSPITAL

FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT

LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS & GRAHAM, INC.Professional Ground-Water and Environmental Services

72 Helena Drive; Suite 140

Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600

FILE: DRAWN BY:q:\Fanny Allen DID

L

GB

DATE: 8/28/061JRD

ROUTE 15

0

SOURCE: United States Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic

Map for the Burlington, VT Quadrangle

FEETSCALE IN

1,000

LOCATION

SITE

SITE LOCATION MAP


FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT



Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600


L

GB

DATE: 8/28/061JRD

ROUTE 15

0

SOURCE: United States Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic

Map for the Burlington, VT Quadrangle

FEETSCALE IN

1,000

LOCATION

SITE

SAMPLING LOCATIONS AT FANNY ALLEN HOSPITAL


FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT



Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600


L

GB

DATE: 8/28/062JRD

ROUTE 15

LEGEND

FAHC WELL LOCATIONFA-1

MONITOR WELL LOCATIONMW-1

TOP OF EMBANKMENT

Notes: This plan references a plan prepared by Civil Engineering

Associates and an elevation and distance survey by LBG on 10/09/06.

0 100

INSCALE FEET

HY D

FIRE HYDRANT

CATCH BASIN

HUB

BYDESCRIPTIONREV.

DID

DATE

FOLLOWING SEPTEMBER 2006 SI & SURVEY1 10/10/06

97.85

WITH WELL CASING ELEVATIONS IN UNITS OF FEET

S SEWER MANHOLE

FORMER BUILDING FOOTPRINT BASED ON

A 1960 UPDATE TO A 1942 SANBORN MAP

APPROXIMATE

SAMPLING LOCATIONS AT FANNY ALLEN HOSPITAL


FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT



Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600


L

GB

DATE: 8/28/062JRD

ROUTE 15

LEGEND



TOP OF EMBANKMENT



0 100

INSCALE FEET

HY D

FIRE HYDRANT

CATCH BASIN

HUB

BYDESCRIPTIONREV.

DID

DATE


97.85

WITH WELL CASING ELEVATIONS IN UNITS OF FEET

S SEWER MANHOLE



APPROXIMATE

FANNY ALLEN

HOSPITAL

CHAPEL

MONASTERY

DORM

ITORY

ROUTE 15

SAINT

MICHAEL'S

COLLEGE

SHED

SHED

MW-3

MW-4

MW-202

MW-201

MW-1

MW-2

FA-2

FA-1

HY D

S

MW-20397.24

96.97

97.22

96.86

96.62

96.50

TBM

97.32HY D

77

'78

'79

'80

'81

'

82

'

83

'

80'

81.60

83.71

83.69

76.69

80.41

80.62

SILTED IN

79.66

GROUNDWATER CONTOUR MAP


FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT



Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600


L

GB

DATE: 10/18/063JRD

ROUTE 15

LEGEND



TOP OF EMBANKMENT



0 100

INSCALE FEET

HY D

FIRE HYDRANT

CATCH BASIN

HUB

BYDESCRIPTIONREV.

DID

DATE


97.85

WITH GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS

S SEWER MANHOLE



APPROXIMATE

OCTOBER 6, 2006IN UNITS OF FEET

81' GROUNDWATER CONTOUR

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

GROUNDWATER CONTOUR MAP


FIGURE:CHECKED BY:

PREPARED BY:

COLCHESTER, VT



Williston, VT 05495

(802) 288-9600


L

GB

DATE: 10/18/063JRD

ROUTE 15

LEGEND



TOP OF EMBANKMENT



0 100

INSCALE FEET

HY D

FIRE HYDRANT

CATCH BASIN

HUB

BYDESCRIPTIONREV.

DID

DATE


97.85

WITH GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS

S SEWER MANHOLE



APPROXIMATE

OCTOBER 6, 2006IN UNITS OF FEET

81' GROUNDWATER CONTOUR

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

FANNY ALLEN

HOSPITAL

CHAPEL

MONASTERY

DORM

ITORY

ROUTE 15

SAINT

MICHAEL'S

COLLEGE

SHED

SHED

MW-3

MW-4

MW-202

MW-201

MW-1

MW-2

FA-2

FA-1

HY D

S

MW-20397.24

96.97

97.22

96.86

96.62

96.50

TBM

97.32HY D

77

'78

'79

'80

'81

'

82

'

83

'

80'

81.60

83.71

83.69

76.69

80.41

80.62

SILTED IN

79.66

TABLES


Well Indentification

Top of Casing Elevation (feet)

Total Depth of Well (feet)

Depth to Product (feet)

Depth to Water (feet)

Product Thickness (feet)

Corrected Depth to Water

(feet)

Water Table Elevation (feet)

MW-1 96.62 NM ND 16.00 0.00 16.00 80.62MW-2 96.50 13.73 Silted in Silted in Silted in Silted in Silted inMW-3 97.21 NM ND 13.50 0.00 13.50 83.71MW-4 96.97 NM ND 13.28 0.00 13.28 83.69MW-201 96.86 20.00 ND 16.45 0.00 16.45 80.41MW-202 97.32 21.80 ND 20.63 0.00 20.63 76.69MW-203 97.24 19.73 ND 15.64 0.00 15.64 81.60FA-1 87.91 NM ND NM 0.00 NM NMFA-2 84.57 9.10 ND 4.91 0.00 4.91 79.66

Notes: 1. Values are referenced to a TBM at 100 feet.2. NL - not located; NM - not measured; ND - not detected.3. Data recorded are referenced to a mark on the well casing.4. Depth to water and product measurements were obtained with a water level meter.

TABLE 1GROUNDWATER TABLE ELEVATIONS

October 6, 2006

Colchester, Vermont Route 15

Fanny Allen Convent

LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Fanny Allen\GW_Tables

Well Idenitification Barium Mercury COD*

MW-1 30.1 <0.5 <5,420MW-3 126 3.9 25,900MW-4 44.7 <0.5 <5,420MW-201 85.1 <0.5 15,600MW-202 25.1 <0.5 17,700MW-203 19.1 <0.5 44,400FA-2 <30 <0.5 11,500

VGES 2,000 2.0 --Notes: 1. VGES - Vermont Groundwater Enforcement Standard. 2. Bold and italicized values in heavily outlined cells exceed the VGES.3. ND - not detected above method detection limits.4. NE - VGES not established.5. Concentration is reported in units of ug/L - micrograms per liter.* Chemical Oxygen Demand value listed in Table 3 of the Vermont Chapter 12:Groundwater Protection Rule and Strategy is a measurement of the acceptable change in COD values. Since no baseline samples were collected, the change inCOD is unkown.

Concentration in ug/L

TABLE 2GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS

Fanny Allen ConventRoute 15

Colchester, Vermont

October 6, 2006

LEGGETTE, BRASHEARS GRAHAM, INC. Q:\Env. Projects 2006\Fanny Allen\GW_Tables


APPENDIX 1

GEOLOGIC LOGS

GEOLOGIC LOG

Leggette, Brashears & Graham, Inc. 72 Helena Drive, Suite 140 Williston, Vermont 05495

PROJECT: WELL/ BORING ID:

Fanny Allen Convent

Route 15 Colchester, Vermont

MW-201

DATE COMPLETED: September 27, 2006 SCREEN TYPE: Schedule 40 PVC DIAMETER: 2-inch Environmental Drilling, Inc. SLOT NO.: 0.010 slot SCREEN SETTING: 10-20’ bgs South Glens Falls, NY SAND PACK SIZE: No. 1 DIAMETER: 2-inch

DRILLING COMPANY:

CASING TYPE: Schedule 40 PVC WELL DEPTH: 20’ bgs DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger CASING SETTING: 0.5-10’ bgs BORING DEPTH: 20’ bgs SAMPLING METHOD: Split Spoon ELEVATION OF RP: 96.86’ REFERNCE POINT: toc LBG PERSONNEL: John Diego SEAL TYPE: 2-inch locking expansion plug/gripper DTW (during drilling): 18’ bgs SURFACE COMPLETION: Steel road box set in concrete to grade COMMENTS: DEPTH (FEET)

WELL DIAGRAM

NOTES GEOLOGY PID (PPMV)

BLOWS/6” OR

RECOVERY

DESCRIPTION

0____ Well Guard <0.1 12” Recovery 0-2’:0-8” – TOP SOIL. 8-12” – SAND, fine, brown.

____ Gripper

____ Concrete <0.1 14” Recovery 2-4’: SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____

4____ <0.1 15” Recovery 4-6’: SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____

____ Riser <0.1 18” Recovery 6-8’:0-14” – SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry. 14-18” – SAND, medium, brown, some stones.

____

8____ 0.2 20” Recovery 8-10’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

____

____ Bentonite 0.2 21” Recovery 10-12’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

____

12___ 0.2 20” Recovery 12-14’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

___

___ 0.2 20” Recovery 14-16’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

___

16___ Sand Pack 0.2 16” Recovery 16-18’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry. Moist at 17’.

___

___ 16” Recovery 18-20’:0-5” – SAND, coarse, brown. 5-16” – SAND, fine, brown, and silt, wet.

___ Screen

20___

___

___

___

24___

___

GRANULAR SOILS COHESIVE SOILS PROPORTIONS USED

BLOWS/FT DENSITY BLOWS/FT DENSITY TRACE 0-10% 0-4 V.LOOSE <2 V.SOFT LITTLE 10-20% 4-10 LOOSE 2-4 SOFT SOME 20-35% 10-30 M.DENSE 4-8 M.STIFF AND 35-50% 30-50 DENSE 8-15 STIFF >50 V.DENSE 15-30 V.STIFF >30 HARD

WATER LEVEL (APPROXIMATE)

GEOLOGIC LOG



Fanny Allen Convent


MW-202


DRILLING COMPANY:


WELL DIAGRAM


BLOWS/6” OR

RECOVERY

DESCRIPTION

0____ Well Guard <0.1 17” Recovery 0-2’:0-11” – TOP SOIL. 11-17” – SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____ Gripper

____ Concrete 0.2 17” Recovery 2-4’: SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____

4____ 0.1 16” Recovery 4-6’: SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____

____ Riser 16” Recovery 6-8’: SAND, medium, brown, some stones, loose, dry.

____

8____ 0.1 17” Recovery 8-10’: SAND, medium, brown, loose, dry.

____

____ 0.2 17” Recovery 10-12’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry. Oxidation bands at 12’. SILT layer at 12’.

____

12___ 0.1 20” Recovery 12-14’:0-8” - SAND, fine to medium, brown. 8-20” – SAND, fine, brown.

___ Bentonite

___ 0.1 20” Recovery 14-16’:0-3” - SAND, fine, brown, and silt, wet. 3-20” - SAND, fine, brown, loose, moist.

___

16___ Sand Pack 0.1 20” Recovery 16-18’:0-2” - SAND, fine, brown, moist. 2-10” – SILT. Wet at 17’.

___ 10-20” – SAND, fine, brown, and silt, moist.

___ 0.1 21” Recovery 18-20’: SAND, fine, brown, and silt, wet.

___ Screen

20___ 0.2 20” Recovery 20-22’: SAND, fine, brown, and silt, wet.

___

___

___

24___

___




GEOLOGIC LOG



Fanny Allen Convent


MW-203


DRILLING COMPANY:


WELL DIAGRAM


BLOWS/6” OR

RECOVERY

DESCRIPTION

0____ Well Guard <0.1 22” Recovery 0-2’: TOP SOIL over SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

____ Gripper

____ Concrete 0.1 18” Recovery 2-4’: SAND, fine, brown, loose, dry.

____

4____ 0.1 16” Recovery 4-6’: SAND, medium, brown, loose, dry.

____

____ Riser 0.1 22” Recovery 6-8’:0-3” - SAND, medium, brown. FILL (brick) over

____ SAND, medium, brown, loose, dry.

8____ 0.1 19” Recovery 8-10’: SAND, medium to coarse, brown, loose, dry.

____

____ 0.1 17” Recovery 10-12’: SAND, medium to coarse, brown, very loose, dry.

____ Bentonite

12___ 0.1 22” Recovery 12-14’:0-4” - SAND, medium to coarse, brown, very loose, dry. 4-22” – SAND, medium, brown, loose, dry.

___

___ 0.1 16” Recovery 14-16’:0-6” - SAND, medium, brown, loose, dry. 6-16” - SAND, fine, brown, and silt, wet.

___

16___ Sand Pack 0.1 18” Recovery 16-18’:0-6” - SAND, medium, brown, wet. 6-18” – SAND, fine, brown, and silt.

___

___ 0.1 16” Recovery 18-20’: SAND, fine, brown, trace silt, wet.

___ Screen

20___

___

___

___

24___

___





APPENDIX 2

LABORATORY REPORT

groundwater monitoring & additional investigation report …

Documents