Thanks for following up with me about the data request and the agenda for tomorrow's meeting.

Based on your description of the technical meetings format, below are the issues we would like to begin to address and discuss at Thursday's meeting, A slide with the text in bold would be helpful for discussion.

1. Cleanup goal to be to return aquifer to its condition prior to spill. Characterization to distinguish the aquifer that has been affected by the LNAPL and dissolved phase plume from the currently unaffected aquifer. 2. Provide quarterly environmental data and updated GIS data to stakeholders. The Water Authority recommends that the actual Access database being used to store data for this project be provided to the participating stakeholders wishing to have quarterly data provided. This will allow KAFB to lock fields andprotect data, but give stakeholders the ability to query and analyze data more efficiently. 3. Collect and analyze additional soil samples to more accurately define LNAPL distribution in the vadose zone in the source area. At a minimum, samples should be analyzed for contaminants, particle distribution, porosity, and saturated hydraulic conductivity. Clay content and clay mineralogy are also desirable. Depth intervals should be five to ten feet between samples. The smaller the interval, the smaller the uncertainty in understanding the spatial distributions of the LNAPl constituents, lithology, and hydraulic properties. 4. Maps or plots of groundwater concentrations include all detected values, even if they do not reach applicable water quality standards. Drawing concentration contours based on water quality standards can provide important information, but eliminating detected contaminants from the data products eliminates or conceals critical data for assessing plume growth or change. 5. Install additional monitoring wells to more accurately define the horizontal downgradient plume boundary. Data from the October 2818 sampling campaign reveal that the horizontal plume extent is much larger than KAFB's current definition and its extent cannot be constrained by those data. Given that fuel-related contamination has been detected in the "sentry well", KAFB-18626, since July 2e18 and that the newly installed groundwater wells leave large gaps to the north, northeast, west, and northwest of KAFB's plume definition, more wells in these gaps are critical to determine the extent of the dissolvedphase plume. 6. Observations of fuel-related contaminants at the KAFB and VA Hospital production wells indicate that contaminants had migrated hundreds of feet below the water table. Install monitoring wells that have screens below the deepest installed screens to unambiguously define the vertical extent of the dissolved-phase plume with depth about the periphery of the LNAPl lens. We recommend that screened intervals be added to reach at least lee ft below the potentiometric surface. 7. Aquifer testing at each well nest must be completed to more accurately define the hydraulic properties of the aquifer. If the monitoring wells are too narrow for pump testing, then a new well should be installed with sufficient diameter at each well nest and with a screen spanning the most productive depth interval so that aquifer testing can be conducted upon development of the new well. Pump test each of the new wells,
2

using nearby wells as observation points, to determine variability in saturated hydraulic conductivity, storage properties, and anisotropy. This should be first implemented at the well nests surrounding the current definition of the LNAPL lens and at wells that identify the dissolve-phase plume extent. 8. Data 1n the 2011 first quarter report. reveal that Shaw's Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPjP) appears to. allow project method detection limits (MDLs) that are significantly larger than those used by the previous contractor. If such discrepancies exist, then Shaw should revise their QAPjP to at least match the project MDLs used by the previous contractor prior to the next quarterly sampling campaign. 9. Continue to improve the design of the interim containment system in an iterative fashion using both analytical and numerical modeling tools with more representative values for aquifer thickness (lee ft or greater) and saturated hydraulic conductivity (40 to 150 ft/day) than those in the original design. 10. Simple well hydraulics show that impa"cts to the interim containment extraction wells from placing the injection well upgradient of the LNAPL lens instead of side gradient can be effectively minimized. As long as the separation distance between the injection wells and the upgradient edge of the LNAPL lens is sufficiently large, there will be a minor increase in clean water flux to the extractions wells, compared to aside-gradient inject~r. 11. Revise the work plan to add soil vapor extraction (SVE) weils to remove LNAPL mass from the downgradient half of the lNAPl lens. Even though SVE will not stop migration of the d~ssolved phase plume) it will accelerate LNAPL removal prior to and during operation of the proposed pump and treat containment system. 12. Given the large volumes of water that will be produced while pump testing the multiple extraction wells, which together could yield one million gallons per day, we recommend that Shaw begin investigating disposal options for the produced water as soon as possible.

Description: Description: http://www.abcwua.org/templates/waterauthority/images/blank.gif <http://www.abcwua.org/>