IITMadras Page 1
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1 Background
A potential hydrocarbon leak was reported at Tondiarpet in the press in July 2013. In
response to this Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited’s (BPCL) whose pipeline is in the
vicinity of the reported spill at Tondiarpet requested IITMadras to carry out a detailed
investigation. The study was intended to identify the source of spill, extent of contamination
and environmental damage and to suggest possible remediation methods. This report
summarizes the findings of the study to ensure that the future land-use will be at its best.
The results of this study will thus enable the stake holders to make an informed decision to
revive the site for future uses. Prior to initiation of field activities IIT, BPCL and TNPCB
had preliminary meetings to finalize study methodology, borehole locations and plume
mapping techniques.
The study area for environmental site assessment is located in Chennai District of
Tamilnadu State and falls under Fort–Tondiarpet Taluk. The site is a congested area located
in Tondiarpet and lies close to the junction of Tiruvottiyur high road (T.H. road) and
VaradarajaPerumalKoil street (VPK street). At the request of Tamilnadu Pollution Control
Board (TNPCB), our team consisting of faculty members Dr. IndumathiNambi and Dr. Ravi
Krishna visited the worst affected bore wells in the site shown below
Figure 1a Location of Site
IITMadras Page 2
1.2 Preliminary Site Investigation
Based on the complaints received, the team visited door nos. 221 to 228 and 231 on
T.H. Road and a few houses on VPK street who had reported oil smell or floating oil at
some earlier time - Door no 13/1, 3/19/2 and 7/2 as indicated in the map below. Samples
taken from bore wells 222, 223, 227, 228 showed significant quantity of fuel oil in the
bailers with almost 60% to 30% of volume of fluid recovered as oil. Preliminary hypothesis
is that there could be both diesel and petrol spilled at this site. One bore well did not have
Figure1b. Location of Bore Wells Sampled during Preliminary Investigation
any product but had sewage smell. The locals recalled that they have slotted pipe only in the
lower part of the bore well. Houses on VPK street did not have product but people
complained of petrol smelling water. The house 7/2 with large open well also had a bore
well where the water was clean. The open well did not have any water but the residents
complained of petrol odor from the well.
The site is a heavily congested area located in Tondiarpet and lies close to the
junction of Tiruvottiyur high road and VPK street. The BPCL pipeline (buried at ~1m
depth) runs parallel to VPK street. Domestic houses and commercial properties lay on either
side of the pipeline. It is located at a distance of 870 m west of the Coastal line and 680 m
west of Kasimedu. It is bounded by Thiruvottiyur high road on the west and Kannakarstreet
IITMadras Page 3
running parallel in the East (Figure 2). Bharath Petroleum Corporation limited (BPCL) is
located at a distance of 600 m west of the contaminated area. MM theatre lies 60 metres
north of the pipeline and Agsatya Theatre lies 70 metres south of the pipeline.
The contaminated area is near to Eureka forbes premises which is located at a
distance of around 30 m in the north west, Tondiarpet Cholera hospital in the north at a
distance approximately 200 m, SNR Dhall mill and ESI Hospital at a distance ranging from
40 – 220 m in the South and South East direction, Agasthya theater, Empower Education
Tech, Devi Polymers, Lotus convent lie at a distance ranging from 70 – 150 m in the
southern direction. Agasthya Flats and Tondiarpet police station is located at a distance
ranging from 200 – 280 m in the south direction. Government peripheral hospital and 110
KV RK Nagar substation is located at a distance ranging from 300 – 380 m in west
direction.
1.3 Conceptual Model of Oil-Subsurface Interactions
The hydrogeology of the area when investigated showed altering layers of sand of
different grain sizes each 10 feet deep up to a depth of 30feet beyond which the sand layer
alternates with clay layers upto 60 feet. Below sixty to eighty feet, it was hard rock. The
pipelines are at a depth of 1.5m below the ground level. The thickness of the sand layers
may vary from place to place.
Ground water has a natural hydraulic gradient toward the east due to the seashore
but it can also be influenced by the localized hydraulic gradients due to pumping. The water
table fluctuates up and down due to rain water infiltration and pumping. When an oil spill
occurs it infiltrates the soil and reaches the groundwater table where it floats like a pool
since it is lighter than water. In summer there is excessive water withdrawal in wells which
causes water table to drop and during monsoon, the recharge of freshwater causes the water
table to rise. Due to water table fluctuation the oil layer also is pulled up and down which
causes the smearing of the oil and trapping of the oil in the soil pore spaces due to capillary
pressure as indicated in Figure 3. The oil layer can also move horizontally along with the
groundwater based on local hydraulic gradients
IITMadras Page 4
Figure 2.The Study Area and its Surrounding Landmarks. The Pipelines Traversing
the Study Area has been highlighted.
The bore wells in the area extend up to the rock bed to a depth of 60 feet with slotted
pipes placed from 20 ft. The depth of the slotted pipe could have varied from one well to the
other. The oil pool will be drained into the bore well only when it intercepts the slots as
Pipe line Potential leak area
IITMadras Page 5
shown in Figure 3c. This could be the reason why in some bore wells the product was seen
as early as November 2012 and some of them do not have any oil even now. This
information has to be confirmed from the bore well drillers. Water depth is at 40 feet in all
the bore wells. The unique feature of this site is that the bore wells are placed at very close
intervals approximately 10 ft from each other since the property is highly fragmented and
each owner has his own bore well in his/her piece of land. This high well density could have
also led to the lowering of the water table in their vicinity due to excessive withdrawals, thus
pulling the oil into their bore wells as indicated in the Figure 3cbelow.It was also noted that
the water and product (oil) yield from the bore wells were very less, about 4 to 5 barrels
(100 litre capacity barrels) a day based on the estimates provided by the BPCL personnel. It
was also observed that when the bore well in House 13/1 was pumped, the water flow
stopped in about two minutes.
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 3 (a) and (b) Smearing of the Floating Oil Layer in the Unsaturated and
Saturated zone(c) Bore well with slots with respect to different water and oil levels
Pre-monsoon/ post pumping water table
Bore well with screens
Post-monsoon/No pumping water table
Floating oil Smeared/trapped oil
IITMadras Page 6
2. Literature Survey
2.1 History of Oil Spill
BPCL officials revealed that there were three pipelines operating in the area running
through VaradarajaPerumalKoil street at a depth of about 1.5 m. One which was dedicated
for carrying petrol was abandoned in July 2010 since it did not pass the pressure test.
Between July 2010 and November 2012 the second line was used to carry both petrol and
diesel, depending on the requirement and shipment from port. About 5 tankers of products
per month (about 40 MT of oil) were transported through this pipeline. In November 2012,
again when the pipeline did not pass the pressure test, a smart ball technique was used to
detect the location of the leak and a section of the pipe near the port was replaced. But this
fix did not help when the pressure test was repeated the pipeline failed again. These pressure
tests were done typically by filling the pipe with pressurized water up to twice the operating
pressure and check for water leaks. Hence, the second line was abandoned sometime
between November 2012- January 2013. It was also understood from the discussions that
such pressure tests are done once in a year or when they observe significant pressure drop
while pumping. The BPCL have reported that they have noticed a pin hole sized crack
during the water testing in the junction of VPK street and TH road which was fixed
immediately in November 2012.
Various products like diesel, kerosene and motor spirit were pumped to different
outlets such as CPCL, IOC and BP terminals. In the month of October 2012, 35,000KL of
High speed diesel, 7300 KL of Motor spirit (petrol) was pumped through the pipeline. In
November 2012, a vessel was due to pump from an oil tanker named ‘MT Jag Pushpa” (as
per the BPCL record) but only water flush was run through the pipeline. It is not clear when
the pipeline was abandoned.
2.2Geology and Hydrogeology of the Site
The site falls under Chennai district as per Central Ground Water Board. Chennai
district is underlain by various geological formations from ancient archaean to the recent
alluvium. The geological formations of the district can be grouped into three units, namely i)
the archaean crystalline rocks ii) consolidated gondwana and tertiary sediments and iii) the
IITMadras Page 7
recent alluvium. The archaean crystalline rocks of the district comprise chiefly of
charnockites, gneisses and the associated basic and ultra-basic intrusive.
The crystalline rocks are weathered and jointed/fractured. The degree and depth of
weathering varies from place to place and the thickness of weathered mantle varies from
less than a metre to about 12 m in this district. The successful bore wells drilled tapping the
deeper fractured aquifers are in Saidapet, Adyar, Kasturba nagar, Gandhi nagar and Ashok
nagar revealed the existence of fracturing down to depth of 60 m below ground level.
The Gondwana shale is black to dark grey in colour and is jointed/fractured. They are
encountered in a number of boreholes and their thickness varies from 24 m in Kilpauk area
through 20 m in Ashok Nagar area to more than 130 m in Koyambedu area.
The occurrence of Tertiaries in Chennai district is not well demarcated. However,
the sandstones encountered in some of the boreholes below alluvium in Binny Road, Poes
Garden, Anna Nagar and Royapuram areas, which belong to Tertiary group. The granular
zones below the Kankar layer in the depth range of 20-28 m bgl in Poes Garden probably
represent tertiary sandstones and tube wells tapping these granular zones yield 2 to 3 lps.
Ground water in Chennai district occurs in all the geological formations namely, the
archaean crystallines, gondwanas, tertiaries and alluvium and is developed by means of ring
wells, dug wells, filter point wells, bore wells and tube wells. The yield and depth range of
aquifers is given in the Table 1.
Table 1. The Yield and Depth Range of Chennai Aquifer
Formation Type of Well Depth Range
(Metres below ground level)
Yield in LPS
(Litres per second)
Alluvium Tubewell
Dugwell
10 to 30
6-11
1-12
0.058 to 1.16
Sandstone Tubewell 20 to 28 2 to 3
Gondwana Tubewell 20 to 60 1 to 3
Crystalline Borewell 10 to 15 Upto 4
IITMadras Page 8
The alluvium covers the major part of the district. The alluvium consists of sand,
silts and clays. The thickness of alluvium varies from place to place and a maximum of 28
m is encountered in north Chennai near Perambur. Kilpauk water works area has 24 m thick
alluvium. The yield of the wells at Kilpauk and Tirumangalam tapping the productive
granular zones met within the alluvium is 25 lps and 6 lps for a drawdown of 7.21 and 0.22
m with a specific capacity of 206.35 and 40 lpm/m of drawdown respectively. In
Tondiarpet ground water is tapped mainly in the alluvium which extends to 80ft depth from
the surface and the depth of borewells in alluvium ranged between 60 to 80 ft and the yield
ranges from 4 to 6 lps. The permeability of the aquifer material obtained at a depth of ca.
20ft. ranges between 1.3 m/day to 2 m/day. The ground water is potable.
2.3 Existing Operations of Properties Adjacent to the Contaminated Site
A reconnaissance survey of properties adjacent to the site to assess the existing
operations around the site was conducted. Residential settlements and commercial small
scale industries lie on all sides of the site. Some of these industries use small quantities of
diesel for running diesel generators. There are no reported leaks from diesel storage tanks
from these industries.
2.4 Receptors Downstream of the Site
The site and the environment can be categorized as belonging to predominantly
domestic set up. The nearest receptors downstream of the site are domestic settlements and
small scale manufacturing industries. The coast lies at a distance of 600 metres eastward to
site. Groundwater is of potable quality and is extracted in the area for domestic use.
IITMadras Page 9
3. Methodology
3.1 Soil Borings and Ground Water Sampling Locations
Following a close review of the topographical characteristics and the existing
features in the site, around 20 soil and groundwater boring locations were identified. The
aspects considered while locating the 20 soil boring locations were:
• Topographical characteristics
• Regional and local ground water flow direction
• Presence of stationary structures like metal structures/buildings etc.
It is to be mentioned drilling of boreholes could not be carried out in grid pattern due to
congested nature of the area, absence of open space and presence of roads with live electric
cables, sewer pipes, telephone cables, drinking water pipelines etc. These were field
limitations.The site map showing the soil and ground water bore locations are shown in the
figure 4 below.
3.2 Well Gauging and Inventory
We conducted an inventory of wells to map the plume i.e. to map wells that had
hydrocarbon contamination and wells that were free of hydrocarbon contamination. A
Solinst interface meter was used to identify the presence and depth of free phase
hydrocarbons in groundwater. The interface meter provides a continuous beep when free
phase hydrocarbons are present and an intermittent beep sound when water is detected. The
sensitivity of the interface probe is 0.5 cm. About 30 borewells around the contaminated
site were identified to map the free phase hydrocarbon plume. The well inventory is shown
in plate 1 and 2 of the Appendix 1. The existing borehole locations where well gauging was
carried out is shown figure 5. Also, the contaminated borewell locations were identified
and shown in figure 6.
IITMadras Page 13
3.3 Drilling of Exploratory Borehole Location and Sampling Frequency
In addition to well inventory we identified 20 boreholes in open areas to determine
the presence of soil and ground water contamination and designated the 20 soil borings
with ID EBW 2 to EBW 21. A field GPS kit was used to map the borehole locations. The
coordinates of soil and ground water sampling locations were marked using the WGS UTM
Datum. Trial pits (Refer Appendix, Plate 3) were taken to make sure there were no live
cables and pipes to ensure safety.
3.4. Drilling of Boreholes for Soil Sampling
We conducted soil borings using 6 inch and 3 inch hand auger bits to a depth of 30
ft till water table was encountered. Representative samples were collected at every 1ft
depth that ran upto 30 ft. Trial pit was used to identify buried objects, live electric cables,
etc. The samples were collected and lithological observations were recorded such as odour,
moisture, contamination characteristics, lithology, extent of visible contamination etc. Use
of hand auger is shown in plate 4of the appendix.
3.5 Gas Sampling
When each boring reached the bottom of each 1ft interval representative soil
sample was collected using hand auger and as the sample was retrieved in a plastic bag, a
sampling tube with a silt filter was inserted that was attached to a gas monitoring device
into the plastic bag. The end of the tube was held at this depth for one to two minutes and
the maximum concentration of the parameters tested for was recorded. To minimize loss of
volatiles during the transfer of gas samples to a lab, we tested for the following gases in soil
in-situ.
• Volatile organic carbon (measured in ppm)
• Lower explosive limit (measured in %)
• Carbon monoxide (measured in ppm)
• Hydrogen sulphide ( measured in ppm)
All parameters were measured using gas /VOC monitor (AreaRAE) which is a multi-gas
detector. Soil sampling activity is shown in photographs 5 and 6 of the appendix. The gas
monitor used for gas measurement is shown in photograph 7 of the appendix.
IITMadras Page 14
3.6 Drilling of Boreholes for Water Sampling
We drilled the boreholes through hand auger without using water or foam and by
this method representative samples were taken. These boreholes were the pre-selected sites
for the required sampling of ground water. Borings were drilled to a depth of 30 ft below
ground level using 6 inch drill bit. Once ground water samples were collected, we
backfilled the boreholes to at the surface to avoid potential surficial contamination from the
surface to reach the ground water. The hand auger with drill tools is shown in Photographs
7 and 8 of the appendix. Although water was initially encountered in the subsurface from
moisture in the interstitial pore-space at saturated zones, the boreholes are often incapable
of producing water adequate for sampling until deeper zones are exposed. Initially, we
attempted to collect ground water samples after drilling 1 m down below water table.
However due to collapse of soil and the presence of sand with poor permeability and slow
recuperation rate of ground water in to the borehole adequate volume of water could not be
retrieved from the well. We spent time and resources but failed to retrieve ground water
sample. Subsequently, we decided to drill to additional depths (approximately 4 ft) from
the water table to collect ground water sample.
3.7 Ground Water Sampling
The ground water samples were collected from the exploratory bore wells using a
disposable bailer. Prior to ground water sample collection from the borings, product and
water level measurements were collected from the borings using Solinst interface meter
probe. A disposable string was used to lower each bailer at each boring. Samples were
subsequently collected using these bailers. The hand auger was decontaminated prior to
use and between sample locations. To avoid cross-contamination of samples, first the
equipment was scrubbed with detergent and then by potable water to remove visible
contamination. Second, the equipment was thoroughly rinsed and scrubbed with potable
water prior to moving to new location. The QA/QC procedures mentioned in the sampling
protocol was followed. Each lab-supplied soil/ground water sample bottle was properly
labeled with the site ID, bottle number and date. The collected samples were packed with
adequate ice and were placed into a laboratory-supplied cooler and taken to the lab for
IITMadras Page 15
further analysis. After sample collection, the boreholes were backfilled with cement to
prevent surficial contamination seeping below.
3.8 Field Analysis
The purpose of the site assessment is to ascertain the presence or absence of various
parameters using the most representative sample. To the extent possible, the samples were
analyzed in the field as quickly as they are first exposed. Elaborate transfers and shipping
procedures geared towards laboratory testing often cause loss of volatiles and in some
instances, change the sample matrix. Bearing this in mind, we field screened the soil and
ground water samples for certain parameters and obtained the results in the field.
3.9 Laboratory Analysis
The preliminary analytical studies at IITMadras were intended to qualitatively
assess the product and groundwater collected from the site. The free oil collected at the
borewells were diluted with Dichloromethane and analysed in Gas Chromatograph with
Mass Spectrograph. The groundwater samples were extracted with Dichloromethane as the
solvent and run in the GCMS. In addition commercially available Petrol and Diesel were
run in the GCMS for comparison. The GCMS can identify the different compounds based
on a library search as the peaks elute through the GC column and reach the detector.
Each petroleum product is a mixture of hundreds of different hydrocarbons which
makes quantitative analysis challenging. The product can be identified based on the typical
finger print it produces in GCMS chromatograms which varies depending on the density of
the compound. The lighter range of compounds like petrol with smaller number of carbon
atoms will have a distinct fingerprint compared to heavier range of product such as
lubricant oil. This can be used to identify the products. In addition different refineries may
have some specific signature chemical or ratios of specific compounds which is a useful tip
to identify the source of the products spilled.
3.10 Electrical Resistivity Tomography Survey
Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) survey is usually conducted following the
various arrangements of four electrodes, two current and two potential, depending upon the
IITMadras Page 16
specific purpose. Electrical resistivity of the rocks or sediments depends on the resistivity
of their mineral matrix and the fluid contained in its pore spaces. The electrical resistivity
of the soil can be considered as a proxy for the variety of soil physical properties that
includes the nature of the solid constituents (particle size distribution , mineralogy) ,
arrangement of voids (porosity , pore size distribution , connectivity) , the degree of water
saturation (water content),electrical resistivity of the fluid (solute concentration) and
temperature. Field data were collected at two cross sections (ERT1 and ERT 2) both
running in the east-west direction. The data were gathered to obtain a continuous coverage
of the subsurface along the line of investigation. A Wenner electrode configuration was
employed in the present study.
IITMadras Page 17
4. Results and Discussion
4.1 Interpretation of Field Results
Well inventory was carried out in about 30 wells surrounding the contaminated
area. Solinst interface meter was used in the borewells which are basically domestic
borewells used by local people. It is understood that BPCL over the last 3 months has been
periodically recovering free phase hydrocarbons. Despite the recovery residents complain
about the presence of hydrocarbon product and VOC emissions in some of the borewells.
Free Phase Hydrocarbon contamination was observed in all the 9 wells of the Lane located
in Plot No. 225 TH road, few houses in VPK street. The wells in plot number 225 lie very
close to each other within distances of 2 metres. The product thickness was observed to be
in the range of 2 inches to 24 inches. The maximum product thickness was observed in well
number BW 222 with a thickness of 24 inches.
The nature of well construction could be the reason for varying thickness of product
in these borewells. Normally in a small area the product thickness should be uniform. For
monitoring product thickness in contaminated areas, the borewell must be constructed with
slotted casings from above water table to the bottom of the well (for the entire water
column). Floating product on ground water can then be accurately recorded in these wells.
In case of plain casings intercepting water level, product thickness will be very much
reduced than the actual.
In VPK street few houses on either side of BPCL pipeline exhibit high level of free
phase product contamination. House Number 5/20 has maximum product thickness of 2.75
ft (33 inches). Dhal Mill which has a borewell showed 3 inches. Similarly 4 other houses
in the lane have recorded 2 to 6 inches of product. One borewell in Devi polymers recorded
oil of about 4 inches and bailing-out has been conducted on and off in this well.
4.2 Field Observations During Soil Boring
Overall the top soil was filled material with graded gravels, cobbles of building
material mixed with brown to dark brown sandy silt. Boreholes were drilled to a depth of
30 ft. The local geology encountered was unconsolidated alluvium comprising
predominantly alternating layers of brown to light brown fine and medium silty sand. Clay
intercalations were not observed in any of the borewells. The particle size distribution
IITMadras Page 18
indicated the soil to be medium to fine sand and the gradation does not vary significantly
over the study area (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Particle Size Distribution of Soil Collected from Borewell # 16
At depths of beyond 22 ft the colour of the sand changed from light brown to grey
to whitish grey fine sand. At depth of 27 to 28 ft fine sandy silt was encountered. Water
table was encountered at depth of 27 to 29 ft below ground level. Hydrocarbon
contamination in soil was observed in boreholes drilled in Devi Polymers, Plot No. 225 TH
road (lane), Agastya Theatre, Gayathri Nursing home, Dr.Aruns house and Dhal Mill. In
most of the wells, hydrocarbon contamination in soil was observed from depth of 19 ftto 28
ft (water table depth). In the case of EBW# 18, soil contamination was observed at a
shallow depth of 6 ft. and extended up to the water table (29 ft.) indicating that this location
(VPK street) could be closer to the source of the spill. In some boreholes moisture with
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Depth of borewell in feet
pan
> 0.075 mm
> 0.150 mm
> 0.212 mm
> 0.425 mm
> 0.600 mm
> 1 mm
> 2 mm
> 4.75 mm
IITMadras Page 19
decomposed odour was observed between 15 to 20 ft depth probably indicating sewerage
pollution. Wherever soil contamination was observed heavy odour of hydrocarbon due to
release of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) was observed. MultiraeGas detector
equipment recorded high VOC readings in the range of 0 to 212 ppm of VOC’s. The soil
borelogs are shown in Figure 8. The VOC readings observed in different exploratory
boreholes are summarized in Table 2.
Figure 8. Soil Borelog Indicating Bore Well Contamination
IITMadras Page 20
Table 2. Contamination Characteristics of Exploratory Wells
EBW No
Depth to Product
Depth to Water, ft
Status of Soil Contamination
VOC range(ppm)
Depth (feet)
2 ND 27.6 HC contaminated 98.9 - 212 15 - 30 3 ND 27.5 HC contaminated 10.5 - 11 29 - 30 4 ND 27.4 No HC contamination 0 0 5 ND 27.5 HC contaminated 3.1 - 61.7 18 - 28 6 28.0 28.2 HC contaminated 11.1 - 169 20 - 28 7 ND 27.5 No HC contamination 0 0 8 ND 28.5 No HC contamination 0 0 9 ND 29.0 No HC contamination 0 0 10 ND 27.2 HC contaminated 22.6 - 190 19 - 26 11 ND 27.6 No HC contamination 0 0 12 ND 26.7 HC contaminated 11.9 - 141 19 – 26 13 ND 28.0 No HC contamination 0 0 14 ND 27.0 HC contaminated 20.4 - 173 21 – 26 15 ND 27.0 No HC Contaminated 0 0 16 28.2 28.3 HC contamination 11 – 194 18.0 – 29 17 27.0 27.1 HC contamination 6.5- 129 11 - 29 18 27.6 27.7 HC contamination 29 – 195 6 – 29 19 ND 30.5 No HC Contaminated 0 0 20 ND ND HC contamination 10.5- 132 12- 25 21 ND ND HC contamination 2 -207 18 -27
HC – Hydrocarbon; ND – Not determined
4.3 Gas Chromatography Results
A comparison of chromatograms presented in Figures 9ato 9c and the overlay
image Figure 9e indicates that the oil collected from the borewell is matching with the
commercial diesel and not commercial petrol. Petrol has only the lighter fractions of the
crude with compounds having less than nine carbon atoms. These compounds have low
boiling point and elute out at shorter retention times. Diesel with a large range of
compounds with higher number of carbon atoms has a distinct signature as shown in Figure
9a.
The zoomed in images presented in Figures 9f and 9g indicate slight variations in
the commercial diesel and diesel from the site. The mass of lighter products (peaks at
IITMadras Page 21
retention times 7.5 and 5.5) are slightly more in the oil collected at site compared to
commercial diesel. This could be due to slight variations in diesel grades or an earlier petrol
spill. It is likely to have petrol since petrol was also pumped through the pipeline
alternating with diesel. But the quantity is only seen as traces compared to large diesel
peaks. The groundwater extracts from bore well (Figure 9d) also indicate compounds from
both the lighter and heavier fraction dissolved in the groundwater.
Figure 9a.Chromatogram of Commercial Diesel.
Figure 9b. Chromatogram of Commercial Petrol
Figure 9c.Chromatogram of the Oil Collected from Borewell in House# 223
IITMadras Page 22
Figure 9d. Chromatogram of Groundwater Collected from Devi Polymers
Figure 9e.Overlay of the Chromatograms of Commercial Diesel and Oil collected at Spill Site
Figure 9f.Chromatogram (First portion) with enlarged image of Lighter Fractions of the Oil.
IITMadras Page 23
Figure 9g. Chromatogram (second half) with Enlarged Image of Heavier Fractions of the Oil.
4.4 Electrical Resistivity Tomography Results
The lithological section shown in figure 10a can be interpreted as four layer model.
In both ERT-1 and ERT 2 there are low resistivity contours up to the 1m depth from the
surface in the top part of the profile indicating the presence of saturated silty sand with
cobbles and pebbles. High resistivity contour suggests the presence of medium to fine
unsaturated silty sand up to the 4 m and 4.5 m depth for ERT-1 and ERT-2, respectively.
Saturated oil sands generally have low resistive value than the alluvium and some of the
value is overlapped between the two. Both ERT-1 and ERT-2 shows slightly low resistive
value of 100 - 400Ω suggesting the presence of the alluvium of fine to silty sand with oil
spill on the sands at a depth of around 9m. Most of the oil seepage is visible at chainage
16m and around 32 to 37m.The low resistive region with contour 10-100 Ω suggest the
presence of the ground water aquifer. The contrast in the resistivity of the sand at third and
fourth layer shows the presence of the oil only upto third layer, i.e. above groundwater
table.
IITMadras Page 24
Figure 10a. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT-1) of Tondiarpet Oil Spill Site
Figure 10b. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT-2) of Tondiarpet Oil Spill Site
4.5 Delineation of Plume Extent
The site harbors a heavy cluster of residential and commercial units which poses a
huge challenge in the demarcation of contaminated plume and its subsurface movement.
One cannot rely fully on the collected data to quantify the extent of remediation since the
depth of the screening of the existing bore wells is an unknown. Plume delineation was
IITMadras Page 25
done based on the collected free phase hydrocarbon product thickness in existing borewells
and newly drilled exploratory borewells. The plume outputs were created using 3D
analysis GIS software tools. The plume output for the free phase product floating on
ground water as of October 2013 is shown in figure 11a. The areal extent of the plume is
about 7141 m2 and its volume is estimated to be around 270 m3. These estimates are arrived
at using de Pastrovich et al. (1979) method wherein the oil in the formation is estimated to
be 1/4th of the oil in the monitoring wells.
When the trench was excavated below the pipeline, there was oil soaked soil at a
shallow depths. There wasn’t adequate time for allowing oil seepage in the exploratory
borewell. Assuming an equivalent amount of oil could be present there as in the adjacent
well, about 30 inches of oil right beneath the trench was assumed and a simulation was
performed (Fig. 11b). The simulation indicated the area and volume of contamination
plume to be around 7580 m2 and 320 m3, respectively. This scenario can be considered as
an upper bound of the contamination. Based on the data provided by BPCL, they had
bailed out about 3493 litres of oil from the contaminated wells as of December 7, 2013 .
Moreover, the available data indicates that the movement of the oil plume is
predominantly eastward during non-pumping periods following the ground water
gradient. During pumping times specifically in summer months, it is governed by
borewell pumping rates and spread slightly north and mostly south. Moreover, extraction
of the oil and oil mixed water has influenced the oil plume movement since the time the
recovery operations started. This indicates that the extraction of water from the aquifer
plays a huge role in the mobility of groundwater and hence remediation efforts should be
planned accordingly.
IITMadras Page 26
Figure 11a. Map Showing the Thickness of Oil Plume Floating above the
Ground Water Table as of October 2013
Figure 11b. Map Showing the Thickness of the Oil Plume considering the presence of
oil in the trench
IITMadras Page 27
4.6 Soil Contamination in the vadose zone
Shallow unconfined ground water table conditions prevail in the area. The water
level ranges from 18 ft during post monsoon and 28 ft below ground level during pre-
monsoon period. Soil contamination spread is predominantly due to initial downward oil
movement by gravity immediately after spill and horizontal plume movement due to
gradient. Subsequently due to monsoon fluctuation in water level the oil could have also
moved up and down vertically. Majority of the oil pools above the water table and the
maximum volatile organic carbon is expected close to the water table or in regions of
coarse sand with high permeability. Oil saturation in the soil was estimated onsite using
the VOC monitor. It was also cross checked with analysis of volatile suspended solid in the
soil samples brought back to the laboratory.
Figure 12a and b show the oil contamination in the vadose zone or the zone above
the water table. It is observed that in well EBW2 no VOC was measured upto 15 feet and
then the values increased level beyond that upto the water table. All borewells away from
the pipeline showed a VSS profile similar to EBW2. Close to the pipeline where the leak
could have originated, the VOC /VSS traces are likely to present in the top layers of the
vadose zone since the spilled free phase, hydrocarbons penetrate soil and reach
groundwater vertically. Subsequently plume moves along the direction where there is
greater groundwater abstraction if there were no recovery of oil. This was observed by the
borewells drilled below the pipeline ( EBW17 and 18). Unlike the other borewells, the oil
was observed in the soil just below the pipeline and extended all the way to the water table
(Figure 12). Maximum Volatile suspended solids was observed close to the water table in
the zone just below the pipeline indicating that the source could be somewhere below the
pipeline (Photoplate # 8-9, Appendix). The VSS value as are quite high in the range of 5-20
g/kg which may lead to large release of toxic /flammable compounds in the atmosphere
during excavation operations and slow release in unpaved areas under normal conditions.
It can also be noted that the VSS data is high at the zone where the coarse grained sand is
present. This confirms the capillary entrapment phenomena which is well established in
literature. The coarse sand will hold the oil to a larger extent because the fine sand below
IITMadras Page 28
with the small pore size will exert a very high capillary resistance to the entry of oil into
their pores.
Figure 12a. Volatile Solids Extracted from the Contaminated Soils.
Note: EBW-17 is located beneath the Excavated Trench; EBW-2 away from the pipeline
The VOC data measured on field is given in the figure 12b below. From Figure 12 b it was
found that the VOC and VSS data closely corroborated indicating shallow contamination
close to the pipeline and deeper contamination away from the pipeline. But the VOC
values in the vadose zone were quite high in many layers close to the water table.
It must be noted that these values are only indicative of the presence and degree of
contamination and do not give the exact quantification. This is because they were measured
onsite and not under controlled conditions like the VSS presented in Table 12.
IITMadras Page 29
Figure 12 b Volatile Organic carbons measured on site at different depths
Bore No/Depth
(ft) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 Legend 3 Not measured 4 No Contamination 5 1-50 ppm (VOC Value) 6 50 -100 ppm (Voc value) 7 101-150 ppm (VOC value) 8 151-240 ppm(VOC Value) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28
29
IITMadras Page 30
4.7 Extent of Ground water Contamination
The groundwater samples were collected from regions within the oil contamination
and beyond. The samples were analysed for 60 VOCs including petroleum hydrocarbons at
SGS laboratories (Appendix II). The dissolved phase plume map for benzene and toluene
are shown below (Figures 13 and 14). Benzene is a well known carcinogen and toluene is a
potential neuro toxin. The USEPA set maximum contaminant level for benzene and toluene
are 5 ug/l and 1 mg/l, respectively. The dissolved plume map indicates a maximum
concentration of the benzene and toluene in groundwater as high as 23 ppm and 108 ppm,
respectively. Moreover, the maximum concentration for both benzene and toluene are
found at VPK street. It can also be noted that the Benzene and Toluene dissolved plume
extends beyond the oil plume. This is because it is in the dissolved phase and moved along
with water.
Figure 13. Dissolved Phase Plume Map of Benzene
IITMadras Page 31
Figure 14. Dissolved Phase Plume Map of Toluene
The dissolved Benzene and Toluene plumes seems to be moving in the
North eastern direction which could be driven by local hydraulic gradients due to pumping.
The future predictions of these plume migrations is uncertain due to the extensive pumping
in the region with multiple borewells. But the contamination of the groundwater will be a
continuous phenomenon and long term as long as there is oil in the aquifer. Literature
suggests that immediate action must be taken if the water shows Benzene and Toluene
concentrations higher than permissible levels. The use of this water must be avoided until
the aquifer is cleaned up and alternative water supply should be provided.
IITMadras Page 32
5. Conclusions and Suggestions for Remediation
A comprehensive evaluation of the site data were collected from existing boreholes
belonging to residents and by conducting resistivity survey and drilling of 20 new
exploratory boreholes in available open spaces.
5.1 Characterization of Spill Site
Based on the available dataset, we have found oil contamination of the aquifer in the
following forms:
1. A large volume of oil floating as a pool on top of the groundwater table as a light
non aqueous phase liquid
2. A significant volume of oil entrapped to the soil as blobs in the vicinity of the
water table both above and below in the vadose zone and saturated layer.
3. Dissolved phase in the groundwater in the vicinity of the oil blobs and oil pool
and moving downstream.
The spill event could be visualized as shown in the figure 15.
5.2 Transport Through Porous Media
Movement of petroleum compounds in the subsurface is controlled by several
processes described in the following simplified scenario (Figure 15). Upon release to the
environment, it will migrate downward under the force of gravity. If a small volume of
petroleum (Light Non Aqueous Phase Liquid, LNAPL) is released to the subsurface, it will
move through the unsaturated zone where a fraction of the hydrocarbon will be retained by
capillary forces as residual globules in the soil pores, thereby depleting the contiguous
liquid mass until movement ceases. If sufficient quantity of petroleum (LNAPL) is
released, it will migrate until it encounters a physical barrier (e.g., low permeability strata)
or is affected by buoyancy forces near the water table. Once the capillary fringe is reached,
the LNAPL may move laterally as a continuous, free-phase layer along the upper boundary
of the water-saturated zone due to gravity and capillary forces.
IITMadras Page 33
Figure 15.Migration of a Petroleum Spill. Figure has been adapted from Delin and others, 1998, USGS Fact Sheet FS-084-98.
Petroleum components may exist in any of four phases within the subsurface. The
NAPL, aqueous, and gaseous phases were mentioned above. Contaminants may also
partition to the solid-phase material (i.e. soil or aquifer materials). In the unsaturated zone
contaminants may exist in all four phases (Figure 15). In the saturated zone NAPL-related
contaminants may be present in the aqueous, solid, and NAPL phases. NAPL constituents
may partition, or move from one phase to another, depending on environmental conditions
(Figure 15). For example, soluble components may dissolve from the NAPL into passing
ground water. The same molecule may adsorb onto a solid surface, and subsequently
desorb into passing ground water. The tendency for a contaminant to partition from one
phase to another may be described by partition coefficients such as Henry's Law constant
for partitioning between water and soil gas. These empirical coefficients are dependent on
the properties of the subsurface materials and the NAPL. A clear understanding of the
phase distribution of contaminants is critical to evaluating remedial decisions (Huling and
Weaver, 1991). It is important to note that this distribution is not static and may vary over
time due to remedial actions and natural processes
IITMadras Page 34
Figure 16. Entrapment in Soil and Partition of Oil into Various Compartments
5.3 Transformations in the subsurface
The subsurface fate of chemicals in the four phases as illustrated in Figure 16is
largely determined by volatilization, dissolution, sorption, and degradation processes.
Dissolution, sorption and degradation of an LNAPL are discussed elaborately since they
are the transformation processes which determine the concentrations of pollutants in
ground water.
Dissolution
A NAPL in physical contact with ground water will dissolve (solubilize, partition)
into the aqueous phase. The solubility of an organic compound is the equilibrium
concentration of the compound in water at a specified temperature and pressure. For all
practical purposes, the solubility represents the maximum concentration of that compound
in water. The solubilities of the compounds most commonly found at Superfund sites range
over several orders of magnitude. Several parameters affecting solubility include
temperature, pH, cosolvents, dissolved organic matter, and dissolved inorganic compounds
(salinity). For a multicomponent NAPL in contact with water, the equilibrium dissolved-
phase concentrations may be estimated using the solubility of the pure liquid in water and
its mole fraction in the NAPL mixture (Feenstra et al., 1991). The maximum concentration
that can be achieved in this scenario is referred to as the effective solubility, as indicated in
equation (1).
Se i = Xi Si (1)
IITMadras Page 35
Where Se i = effective aqueous solubility of compound i in NAPL mixture
Xi = mole fraction of compound i in NAPL mixture
Si = aqueous solubility of the pure-phase compound
For example, for petroleum containing numerous compounds (Johnson et al.,
1990b), the mole fractions of benzene are 0.0076 and 0.0021 in fresh and aged samples,
respectively. The solubility for benzene is 1780 mg/l (U.S.EPA, 1990). Yet, the predicted
effective solubility would be only 13.5 mg/l and 3.78 mg/l for fresh and weathered
gasoline, respectively. The more soluble compound will potentially partition into ground
water more readily than the less soluble compound. According, less soluble compounds
will primarily be associated with the NAPL phase and dissolution and transport in the
aqueous phase will be limited relative to more soluble components.
The effective solubility represents the concentration that may occur at equilibrium
under ideal conditions. Laboratory studies (Banerjee, 1984) indicate that effective
solubilities calculated using Equation 1 are reasonable approximations for mixtures of
organic liquids that are hydrophobic, structurally similar, and have low solubilities.
Effective solubilities of components in more complex mixtures, such as petroleum
products, appear to be in error by no more than a factor of two (Leinonen and Mackay,
1973). However, the degree to which these compounds partition to the water phase is a
function of many variables including cosolvency (Rao et al., 1991). Cosolvency effects
may occur in cases where dissolution of highly soluble components (e.g., alcohols)
significantly increase the solubility of other components. In general, higher dissolution
rates may be associated with higher ground-water velocities, higher LNAPL saturation in
the subsurface, increased contact area between LNAPL and water, and LNAPLs with a
high fraction of soluble components (Mercer and Cohen, 1990; Miller et al., 1990).
However, recent studies (e.g., Powers et al., 1992) indicate that nonequilibrium effects may
limit contaminant mass transfer by dissolution under certain conditions such as high
groundwater velocity. Laboratory and modeling studies conducted by many researchers
(e.g., Borden and Kao, 1992; Geller and Hunt, 1993; Powers et al., 1991) indicate that
complete dissolution of an LNAPL may require hundreds or thousands of pore volumes of
water under ideal field conditions. These studies observed initially high aqueous
IITMadras Page 36
contaminant concentrations which were followed by a period of rapid decline and an
asymptotic period during which concentrations declined slowly.
Sorption
Sorption is defined as the interaction of a contaminant with a solid (Piwoni and Keeley,
1990). In soil or aquifer material contaminated with LNAPL, contaminants from the
LNAPL will partition onto solid phase material. The primary pathway in which this process
occurs is through the water phase, as indicated in Figure 16. For example, when LNAPL is
released into the subsurface, components will dissolve into the aqueous phase, then
partition onto aquifer material. Numerous parameters affect sorption at hazardous waste
sites including solubility, polarity, ionic charge, pH, redox potential, and the octanol/water
partition coefficient (Piwoni and Keeley, 1990). In general, solid-phase (adsorbed)
contaminants may represent a small fraction of the total contaminant mass in soil and
aquifer material where continuous phase or residual NAPL exists. The majority of the
contaminant mass in these systems is typically present in the nonaqueous liquid phase.
Desorption of the contaminant (i.e. mass transfer of contaminant from the solid phase to the
water phase) is often a rate-limited step and is partially responsible for the tailing effect
commonly observed in ground-water pump-and-treat systems.
Biodegradation
Many of the petroleum compounds are amenable to biological degradation in the
aqueous phase by naturally occurring microorganisms in the subsurface. However, there is
an important distinction between aqueous-phase and NAPL biodegradation. The distinction
is the inability to create and maintain conditions that are conducive to microbial activity
within a NAPL. In brief, biodegradation of pure phase hydrocarbon does not appear to be
practical and has not been demonstrated. Considerable research has focused on evaluating
aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation and transformation processes. These processes play
an important role in the ultimate fate of petroleum in the subsurface, both in the form of
naturally occurring and actively engineered remediation processes (Norris et al., 1994).
IITMadras Page 37
5.4 Implications of Petroleum Contamination on Human Health
The partitioning of petroleum compounds in air, water and soil indicates that there is
a risk by inhalation, drinking and bathing with contaminated water and soil during
excavation scenario. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has
determined that one major component of petroleum , Benzene is carcinogenic to humans.
IARC has also determined that other petroleum compounds such as benzo[a]pyrene are
probably and possibly carcinogenic to humans. Some of the petroleum compounds can
affect the central nervous system, can cause headaches and dizziness at high levels in the
air, nerve disorder called "peripheral neuropathy," consisting of numbness in the feet and
legs. Other compounds can cause effects on the blood, immune system, lungs, skin, and
eyes. Animal studies have shown effects on the lungs, central nervous system, liver, and
kidney from exposure to petroleum compounds. Some petroleum compounds have also
been shown to affect reproduction and the developing fetus in animals.
5.5 Major Findings from the Investigations
• Fill material to 3 ft followed by different grades of alluvial sand upto 30 ft was the
geology observed in the area.
• Free phase hydrocarbon is present in 15 existing borewells and 3 newly drilled
boreholes.
• The product thickness in borewells ranges from 1 inch to 33 inches.
• Free phase hydrocarbon is present on either side of the BPCL pipeline close to
junction of TH road and Varadaja Perumal Koil street. The plume is confined to a
limited area.
• A review of plume delineation map indicates that the source of hydrocarbon leak is
somewhere in VPK street close to TH Road. This was confirmed by drilling
borewells below the pipeline in that stretch of the road.
• The areal extent of the oil spread in the aquifer is around 7141 m2 – 7580 m2 and
volume of the free phase hydrocarbon spill is approximately 270 m3 - 320 m3,
respectively. These numbers are based on the interpolation of the oil depth data
measured on field.
IITMadras Page 38
• The free product in the borewells in the residences indicated diesel range organics
whereas the free product in the borwells dug below the pipeline indicated a highly
viscous heavier fraction. This is quite possible since multiple products were
pumped in these pipelines.
• Soil contamination was observed in 12 out of 20 newly drilled exploratory wells.
• The depth of soil contamination starts from 19 to 20 ft below ground level in all
regions except the zones below the pipeline where it was much shallow and close to
the bottom of the pipeline.
• The contaminated soil thickness ranges between 10 to 12 ft spread over a limited
area. Contamination of soil in the range 5g/kg to 20 g/kg was observed above and
below the water table indicating the smearing of the oil pool due to water table
fluctuation.
• Ground water in the region was contaminated with many compounds as listed in the
Appendix III. Benzene and Toluene in groundwater as high as 23 ppm and 108
ppm, respectively
5.6 Future Directions and Challenges
Based on our results and observations it is recommended that the following steps
could be undertaken for complete cleanup of the area:
1. Installing recovery wells in the trench close to the source and in the locations which
show maximum standing oil depths
2. Removal of free product through a combination of proven techniques such as dual
phase pumping, surfactant enhanced removal or other proven technologies.
3. Removal of trapped oil from the vadose zone through proven techniques such as soil
vapour extraction
4. Insitu treatment of contaminated groundwater and removal of blobs in saturated
zone by chemical or biological methods.
5. Installation of monitoring wells at the higher contamination zones and periphery of
the dissolved plume to monitor the effect of oil removal and ground water
remediation.
IITMadras Page 39
5.7 Description of Remediation Technology
Installation of Recovery/Monitoring Wells
Installation of monitoring wells will enable us to assess the changes in groundwater
characteristics and variation in the groundwater flow direction over a period of time.
Drilling of a monitoring well in a contaminated area should be done with caution to avoid
cross contamination of the aquifer material from one place to another. Moreover, a
lithologic log has to be recorded that documents the textural and visibly determinable
properties of the aquifer material with depth. Samples must be collected at regular intervals
especially when difference texture or geology is observed. A section of the typical
monitoring well for a shallow and a deep aquifer is shown in the figure below.
Figure 17: Monitoring Wells in a Shallow and a Deep aquifer.
Source: Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development.
IITMadras Page 40
The well tube is typically made of PVC material. The length of the well screen is
dependent upon the thickness of the hydrogeologic unit, the vertical scale of investigation
and the specific requirements of the monitoring program. Moreover, the length of the
screen should be such that it allows for sufficient level of bentonite seal application below
ground level. The annular space between the screened section of the well and the borehole
is filled with sandy material up the depth of which covers the complete screened length.
Beyond the filter sand pack, watertight bentonite seals are applied which acts as a primary
seal. Above the primary seal, secondary hydrated bentonite material is filled. The top of the
monitoring well should be capped and a small air vent is provided to allow free air
movement. Finally, to protect the monitoring well, a steel casing with a lock provision may
be provided. Moreover, to avoid surface water from entering into the well a small mound is
created at the ground level. The monitoring wells should be installed with the help of
experienced personnel under professional supervision.
Removal of free phase oil The most common strategy for maximizing the recovery of free-phase LNAPL is
to pump (Figure 17) the LNAPL layer relatively slowly in order to keep the LNAPL mass
as a continuous flowing mass (Charbeneau et al., 1989; and Abdul, 1992). Water
pumping is avoided or carefully controlled to minimize smearing of the LNAPL layer,
although some water pumping may be helpful to prevent upconing of the water table.
Although high water pumping rates will initially yield a higher hydrocarbon recovery
rate, the ultimate recovery will be greatly reduced because much of the LNAPL that was
originally “flowable” (that is, a free phase) is smeared into uncontaminated soil as the
water table is depressed, converting it to an “unflowable” residual LNAPL.
IITMadras Page 41
Figure 18. NAPL Recovery systems: (a)Two well - two pump (b) One well- two
pump
Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE)
Soil pore extraction is an important technology to treat spills of volatile organic
compounds in the unsaturated zone. Vacuum extraction involves passing large volumes
of air through or close to a contaminated spill using an air circulation system. The organic
compounds volatilize or evaporate into the air and are transported to the surface where
they are collected and treated. This technology is suited to remove volatile compounds
that are trapped at residual saturation and the free product layers. Hence this method
works well for the contaminants that have high vapor pressure and low water solubility.
Further, this method is more suited for subsurface system that is relatively permeable and
homogeneous. Since soil surface would lead to short-circuiting of the airflow, the site has
to be covered by an impermeable surface during operation (Suthersan, 1997). In
comparison to pump and treat and excavation, SVE can be cost effective and more
efficient.
A typical soil vapor extraction system is shown in Figure 18. The key design
parameters are the vapor pressure of the volatile chemicals in the NAPLs and the
permeability of the zone that will be used for vapor extraction. It consists of one or more
extraction wells, one or more injection wells, vacuum pumps or air blowers, flow meters
IITMadras Page 42
and controllers and a vapor treatment unit. Extraction wells are typically designed to fully
penetrate the unsaturated zone to the capillary fringe. Vapor treatment may not be
required if the emission rates are low or if they are easily degraded in the atmosphere.
Typical treatment systems include liquid-vapor condensation, incineration, catalytic
conversion or granular activated carbon adsorption.
Figure 19. A Typical Soil Vapor Extraction System
The major design criteria for an SVE system are as follows: the required vacuum
to induce adequate airflow and its radius of influence, air flow rates to achieve adequate
mass removal, number of vent wells, well screen positioning, monitoring of soil moisture
content, passive well placement, off-gas treatment technology, maintenance, operation
and remote monitoring, underground piping and well design, closure SVE system
management. Some of the above criteria can be ascertained a priori by conducting field-
pilot study and bench-scale laboratory tests. Once the design parameters are obtained the
various design approaches to plan an SVE system are(1) empirical approach(2) radius of
influence approach and (3) modeling approach.
While soil vapor extraction is primarily directed at remediation of NAPLs in
unsaturated soils, it can be adapted to the removal of volatile hydrocarbons in NAPLs
from the saturated zone. First, there will be some transport of volatile organics from
contaminated ground water into an air stream being forced across the water table by a soil
IITMadras Page 43
vapor extraction system. However, a much more important process occurs when the
water table is depressed, either intentionally or inadvertently, by a ground water pumping
system, thereby exposing the former saturated zone to the effects ofa soil vapor extraction
system.
Pump and Treat Remediation
In cases where the water table cannot be depressed to allow soil venting, clean
ground water can be drawn across the NAPL zone to dissolve soluble organic for
subsequent removal by a ground water pump-and-treat system. The treatment will be
done exsitu on the ground surface using air stripper or carbon adsorption towers. In most
cases this approach will remove some quantities of contaminant mass, but will be im-
practicable for restoring aquifers to drinking-water standards.
Insitu Chemical Oxidation
In situ chemical oxidation, also referred to as ISCO, is an aggressive remediation
technology that has been applied to a wide range of volatile and semivolatile hazardous
contaminants, including DNAPL source zones and the dissolved-phase chemicals
emanating from the source zones. Chemical oxidation typically involves
reduction/oxidation (redox) reactions that chemically convert hazardous compounds to
nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile, or inert. Redox
reactions involve the transfer of electrons from one compound to another. Specifically,
one reactant is oxidized (loses electrons) and one is reduced (gains electrons). The
oxidizing agents most commonly used for treatment of hazardous contaminants in soil
and groundwater are hydrogen peroxide, catalyzed hydrogen peroxide, potassium
permanganate, sodium permanganate, sodium persulfate, and ozone. Each oxidant has
advantages and limitations, and while applicable to soil contamination and some source
zone contamination, they have been applied primarily toward remediating groundwater.
IITMadras Page 44
Aerobic/Anaerobic in Situ Bioremediation
Before adopting the insitu bioremediation process the feasibility of the process
must be studied. The important factors to be evaluated are biodegradability of
contaminants, mineralization potential of the compounds, specific microbial substrate and
other conditions, availability of nutrients, hydrogeology of the site, extent and
distribution of the contamination, and biogeochemical parameters.
Existing literature on biodegradability studies indicate that in the case of LNAPL
contamination which includes a mixture of hydrocarbons, C1 to C15 compounds are
easily biodegradable. C12 to C20 hydrocarbons are biodegraded with moderate easiness
whereas polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are very difficult to degrade (Suthersan,
1997). Moreover, the mechanism of degradation of the above compounds can be vastly
different. Lighter hydrocarbons can undergo aerobic degradation with oxygen as a
terminal electron acceptor whereas PAHs are prone to be degraded under a
cometabolistic pathway. Since different pathways are involved in the contaminant
degradation process, the essential parameters (e.g., redox, nutrient availability, dissolved
oxygen) are to be maintained for the specific reaction to occur. Moreover, the site
hydrogeology in terms of hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer, depth to the water table
and thickness of the saturated zone should be ascertained. Further, microbial
characterization studies (viable bacterial counts) and contaminant plume demarcation will
aid in the proper design of insitu bioremediation system.
IITMadras Page 45
Insitu bioremediation process can be achieved via two methods. They are
bioaugmentation and biostimulation. Bioaugmentation is the process of adding
exogeneous microbes to the subsurface that is targeted towards a specific contaminant.
Biostimulationinvloves the addition of electron acceptor or growth supporting nutrients
that could enhance the activity of microorganisms.The process is intended to stimulate
the indigenous subsurface microorganisms by the addition of nutrients and/or an electron
acceptor to biodegrade the contaminants of concern. For the aerobic degradation of the
organic contaminant, usually hydrogen peroxide is injected which could supply oxygen
for aerobic biodegradation.In the case of enhanced anaerobic degradation, nitrate
feedstockis injected. The nitrate feedstock is preferred as a terminal electron acceptor
because of it is high water solubility. Moreover, easily degradable organic substrate
(acetate, lactic acid, sucrose etc.) is injected in some cases to enhance the cometabolic
degradation of highly recalcitrant hydrocarbons such as PAHs. Hence in the case of
contamination of the subsurface by a mixture of contaminants a sequential aerobic and
anaerobic degradation design is preferred.
A typical bioremediation system is shown in Figure 20. In contrast to other
remediation techniques that transfer the contaminants from one phase to the other, in situ
biorestoration offers partial or complete destruction of the contaminants. Partial
destruction takes place usually because the chemicals may not all be available to the
microorganisms due to transport limitations or because the chemicals may not be
completely mineralized but rather biotransformed to other organic chemicals.
IITMadras Page 46
Figure 20. Insitu Aerobic Bioremediation System
In situ bioremediation might offer attractive economic benefits because it
precludes the need for excavation, transportation, and disposal costs. Additionally, insitu
remediation can be used to treat contaminants that are sorbed to the aquifer matrix and
dissolved in the groundwater simultaneously. The disadvantage could be the slow rates of
biodegradation and the possibility of generating undesirable intermediate compounds
during the biodegradation process that are more persistent in the environment than the
parent compound.
In situ biodegradation can be considered to be a polishing step to the NAPL
dissolution process. In cases where large amounts of NAPL are trapped in the subsurface,
in situ biodegradation will proceed relatively slowly because of the limited solubility of
oxygen in the injection water. Application of biodegradation is most effective near the
end stages of a remediation process, where large volumesof ground water are required to
remove small masses of hydrocarbon. Aerobic biodegradation is applicable to sites
contaminated with most petroleum-related LNAPLs and some polyaromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs).
IITMadras Page 47
Air sparging: Air sparging is an in situ remedial technology that reduces concentrations of
volatile constituents in petroleum products that are adsorbed to soils and dissolved in
groundwater. This technology, which is also known as "in situ air stripping" and "in situ
volatilization," involves the injection of contaminant-free air into the subsurface saturated
zone, enabling a phase transfer of hydrocarbons from a dissolved state to a vapor phase.
The air is then vented through the unsaturated zone.
Air sparging is most often used together with soil vapor extraction (SVE), but it can also be
used with other remedial technologies. When air sparging (AS) is combined with SVE, the
SVE system creates a negative pressure in the unsaturated zone through a series of
extraction wells to control the vapor plume migration. This combined system is called
AS/SVE When used appropriately, air sparging has been found to be effective in reducing
concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) found in petroleum products at
underground storage tank (UST) sites. Air sparging is generally more applicable to the
lighter gasoline constituents (i.e., benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene [BTEX]),
because they readily transfer from the dissolved to the gaseous phase. Appropriate use of
air sparging may require that it be combined with other remedial methods (e.g., SVE or
pump-and-treat). The airsparging can also trigger and enhance natural bioremediation of
contaminants in the ground water due to the injection of oxygen.
Figure 21: Air sparging for volatilization and Bioremediation of contaminants
IITMadras Page 48
5.8 Concluding Remarks:
Oil spills are quite common in areas where oil is handled. Recent report of the American
petroleum Industry (2009) reports the following data ( Table 3) which indicates the
figures for volume of oil spilled in U.S.A from various sources in billion barrels. It is
important to take preventive measures to ensure that quantum spilled due to human
errors is minimum. Leak detection systems with online monitoring and alarm systems can
prevent major spills. The oil facilities should be located away from residential areas to
minimize disasters and health impacts. The spill response plan should be prepared and
action taken immediately in the event of a spill to mitigate environmental damage.
There is a need to create a similar data base on oil spills in India so that we can
consolidate the quantum of spills and draft a spill response plan. This transparency
necessitates a relook at the environment policy and regulation so that we can enable the
oil industry to report spills
Table 3: Estimated Average Annual U.S. Oil Spillage from Petroleum Industry Sources (bbl)
Source 1969-1977 1978-1987 1988-1997 1998-2007 PRODUCTION 31,435 8,701 15,183 9,938 Offshore Platform Spills 25,858 1,344 1,814 1,273 Offshore Pipelines 4,482 3,462 8,127 2,614 Offshore Supply Vessels 95 245 48 10 Inland Production Wells 1,000 3,650 5,194 6,041 REFINING 3,000 3,512 15,015 12,136 Refinery Spills 3,000 3,512 15,015 12,136 TRANSPORT 488,662 301,645 190,753 96,393 Coastal/Inland Pipelines 259,340 181,196 118,297 76,754 Tanker Trucks 3,000 4,888 5,213 9,181 Railroads 2,000 2,322 2,164 1,431 Tank Ships 192,492 60,250 42,197 3,598 Tank Barges 31,830 52,989 22,882 5,429 STORAGE AND CONSUMPTION 1,195 1,195 1,564 814
Gas Stations 1,195 1,195 1,564 814 TOTAL Petroleum Industry Spillage 524,292 315,053 222,515 119,281
IITMadras Page 49
Clean up of inland spill sites is a long term process running into several years. It involves
a lot of expertise and a series of steps including detailed site characterization and
implementation of technologies in a sequential manner. It also requires a large and
continuous funding source and often supplemented by government funding sources. In
U.S.A superfund was created o support cleanups. Superfund Remediation Report
(2014).4th Edition focuses on the analysis of Superfund remedial actions from fiscal
years (FY) 2009 to 2011. The report includes remedies selected in 459 decision
documents signed in this three-year period. Air sparging coupled with Soil vapor
extraction, chemical treatment, multi-phase extraction, bioremediation and permeable
reactive barrier wall are the most frequently selected in situ treatment technologies for
sources as reported in the Superfund remedial report.
Figure 22: Popular Remediation Technologies in Superfund Sites of U.S.A
The choice of technology or a set of technologies has to be decided based on the site
conditions and nature of spill by experienced environmental engineers and
hydrogeologists. Monitoring of cleaned up sites for a much longer duration is also
essential to ensure that there is no rebound of contamination.
IITMadras Page 50
References
Banerjee, S., 1984.Solubility of organic mixtures in water,Environ. Sci. Technol., 18(8): 587-591. Borden, R.C., and C.M. Kao, 1992.Evaluation of groundwater extraction for remediation of petroleum-contaminated aquifers, Water Environ. Res., 64(1): 28-36. DiGiulio, D.C., and J.S. Cho, 1990. Conducting field tests forevaluation of soil vacuum extraction application, in Proc.Fourth Natl. Outdoor Action Conf. on Aquifer Restoration, Ground Water Monitoring, and Geophysical Methods, Natl.Ground Water Assoc., Dublin, OH, 587-601. Feenstra, S., D.M. Mackay, and J.A. Cherry, 1991. A methodfor assessing residual NAPL based on organic chemicalconcentrations in soil samples, Ground Water Monit. Rev.,11(2): 128-136. Geller, J.T., and J.R. Hunt, 1993.Mass transfer fromnonaqueous phase organic liquids in water-saturated porousmedia, Water Resour. Res., 29(4): 833-845. Huling, S.G., and J.W. Weaver, 1991.Dense nonaqueousphase liquids, Ground Water Issue, EPA/540/4-91-002,U.S.EPA, R.S. Kerr Environ. Res. Lab., Ada, OK, 21 pp.Johnson, P.C., C.C. Stanley, M.W. Kemblowski, D.L. Byers,and J.D. Colthart, 1990b.A practical approach to the design,operation, and monitoring of in situ soil-venting systems,Ground Water Monit. Rev., 10(2): 159-178. Leinonen, P.J., and D. Mackay, 1973. The multicomponentsolubility of hydrocarbons in water, Can. J. Chem. Eng., 51:230-233. Mercer, J.W., and R.M. Cohen, 1990. A review of immisciblefluids in the subsurface: Properties, models, characterization,and remediation, J. Contam. Hydrol., 6: 107-163. Miller, C.T., M.M. Poirier-McNeill, and A.S. Mayer, 1990.Dissolution of trapped nonaqueous phase liquids: Masstransfer characteristics, Water Resour. Res., 26(11): 2783-2796. Norris, R.D., R.E. Hinchee, R. Brown, P.L. McCarty, L.Semprini, J.T. Wilson, D.H. Kampbell, M. Reinhard, E.J.Bouwer, R.C. Borden, T.M. Vogel, J.M. Thomas, and C.H.Ward, 1994. Handbook of Bioremediation, Lewis Publishers,Boca Raton, FL, 257 pp. de Pastrovich, T.L.,Y. Baradat, R. Barthel, A.Chiaarelli, and D.R. Fussell. 1979. Protection of groundwater from oil pollution. CONCAWE, Report 3/79. Den Hagg, Netherlands. 61pp. Piwoni, M.D., and J.W. Keeley, 1990.Basic concepts ofcontaminant sorption at hazardous waste sites, Ground WaterIssue, EPA/540/4-90/053, U.S.EPA, R.S. Kerr Environ. Res.Lab., Ada, OK, 7 pp.
IITMadras Page 51
Powers, S.E., C.O. Loureiro, L.M. Abriola, and W.J. Weber,Jr., 1991.Theoretical study of the significance ofnonequilibrium dissolution of nonaqueous phase liquids insubsurface systems, Water Resour. Res., 27(4): 463-477. Rao, P.S.C., L.S. Lee, and A.L. Wood, 1991.Solubility,sorption, and transport of hydrophobic organic chemicals incomplex mixtures, Environmental Research Brief, EPA/600/M-91/009, U.S.EPA, R.S. Kerr Environ. Res. Lab., Ada, OK,14 pp Suthersan, Suthan. S 1997. Remediation Engineering: Design Concepts. Lewis Publishers. U.S.EPA, 1990. Subsurface contamination reference guide,EPA/540/2-90/011, U.S.EPA, Washington, DC, 13 pp. U.S.EPA, 1992a.Dense nonaqueous phase liquids –Aworkshop summary, Dallas, Texas, April 16-18, 1991, EPA/600/R-92/030, U.S.EPA, R.S. Kerr Environ. Res. Lab., Ada,OK, 81 pp.
IITMadras Page 52
6. Appendix I
Plate 1 : Well Gauging at Tondiarpet Contaminated Area
Plate 2: Assessment using Interface Meter at Tondiarpet Contaminated Area
IITMadras Page 53
Plate 3:Trial Pit
Plate 4: Hand Auger Drilling at Tondiarpet Exploratory Bore hole
IITMadras Page 54
Plate 5: Groundwater sampling atTondiarpet Contaminated Area
Plate 6: Soil Sampling at Tondiarpet Contaminated Area
IITMadras Page 55
Plate 7: Soil and Gas Monitoring at Tondiarpet Contaminated Area
Plate 8: Drilling of Exploratory Borewell # 18 Right beneath the BPCL pileline
IITMadras Page 56
Plate 9: Contaminated Soil Observed at a Shallow Depth of6 ft. in Exploratory Borewell # 18
IITMadras Page 57
Appendix – II
Table AI1 1: Coordinates of Exploratory Borehole Locations
S.NO. BOREHOLE ID EASTING NORTHING
1 EBW 2 422967 1451047
2 EBW 3 422953 1451050
3 EBW 4 422928 1451016
4 EBW 5 422970 1451010
5 EBW 6 423008 1451096
6 EBW 7 423065 1451096
7 EBW 8 422838 1451028 8 EBW 9 422944 1451037 9 EBW 10 422967 1451117
10 EBW 11 423112 1450993 11 EBW 12
422979 1451120 12 EBW 13 422955 1451120 13 EBW 14
423007 1451092 14 EBW 15 422927 1451080 15 EBW 16 423024 1451074 16 EBW 17 422960 1451097 17 EBW 18 422960 1451097 18 EBW 19 422941 1450948 19 EBW 20 423002 1451090 20 EBW 21 423021 1451082
IITMadras Page 58
Table AII 2: Well Inventory of Borewells with Free Phase Hydrocarbon: Measured with Interphase probe in October 2013.
S. No Location Easting Northing Depth to
product (ft)
Depth to Water (ft)
Product Thickness (ft)
1 Door No 231, TH Road
422987 1451045 28.56 28.9 0.34
2 Door No 225, TH Road
422980 1451070 27.56 29.23 1.67
3 Door No223 TH Road 422975 1451071 26.60 26.65 0.05 4 Door No 227 TH
Road 422967 1451072 32.56 32.59 0.03
5 Door No 222 TH Road
422963 1451073 26.9 28.9 2
6 Door No 228 TH Road
422954 1451079 27.0 27.2 0.2
7 Door No 221 TH Road
422948 1451079 26.69 26.79 0.1
8 5/20 VP Koil street 422990 1451109 25.15 27.90 2.75 9 3/1/19 Karpagam
Illam, VP koil street 422971 1451126 28.9 20 1.1
10 15/6 VP koil street 422998 1451091 31.4 31.5 0.1 ND: Not detected
IITMadras Page 59
Table AII 3: Locations of water samples taken by IITM
Well # Easting Northing Address / Location Landmark 1 423058 1451107 Arun Hospital , Pillaiyar Koil Street.
2 423082 1451176
Lakshmi Nilayam , Old No.- 11/12 , New No. 36/1, Pillaiyar Koil
Street.
3 423006 1451090 Door No. 5/20 , V.P Koil Street, Next to Dr. Suhas Prabhakar House
4 423069 1451176 No. 671/206 , T.H Road / Loganathan Thirumana Mandapam
5 423069 1451312 No. 200, T.H Road / Madhav Pipes & Tubes
6 422919 1451070 N.Gajendran, 614/2 , New No.- 570 , T.H Road / Opp. Devi Polymer
7 422912 1450972 S.V .Complex, No. 233/1A ,T.H Road
8 423040 1451053 6/32 , Kanakar Street
9 423054 1450990 Old No. 6/2, New No. 25, Kanakar Street
10 422996 1450984 Door No. 24/3 , Old No. 31/7, Kanakar Street / Ganesh Colony
11 423055 1450950 Door No. 17, Kanakar Street / Near To Ganesh Colony
12 423024 1451074 Door No. 221, TH Road / Inside Narrow lane
13 422955 1451120 New Construction Building / next to Orthocare
14 423008 1451096 Inside Agastya Theater
15 422967 1451117 Orthocare / Parallel to TH Road , Opposite to Microfinance Building
IITMadras Page 60
Table AII 4 Locations of Water samples taken by BPCL
Well # Address of the Location
1 Door No 221, TH Road
2 Door No 222, TH Road
3 Door No 223, TH Road
4 Door No 225, TH Road
5 Door No 227, TH Road
6 Door No 228, TH Road
7 Door No 229, TH Road
8 Door No 231, TH Road
9 Door No 681, TH Road
10 Door no 12/16, VP Koil Street
11 Door no 12/16A, VP Koil Street
12 Door no 13/1, VP Koil Street
13 Door no 13/2, VP Koil Street
14 Door no 15/6, VP Koil Street
15 Door no 3-2/19, VP Koil Street
16 Door no 5/20, VP Koil Street
17 Door no 667, VP Koil Street
18 Door no 671, VP Koil Street
IITMadras Page 61
Appendix III TableAIII 1: Concentration of Dissolved Hydrocarbons in the Wells Sampled by IIT
Well no/Compound Units 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Alkyl Benzene Benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 34588.34 25.1 7.49 2.72 2.28 Toluene Ug/L BDL 1.35 96257.22 50.48 27.26 9.88 8.51 Ethyl Benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 6967.29 4.87 3.19 1.17 1.02 m and p-Xylene Ug/L BDL 0.38 23951 18.65 11.08 3.88 3.12 O-Xylene Ug/L BDL 0.43 BDL 13.94 8.01 2.67 2.38 Isopropyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 430 BDL BDL BDL BDL 1,3,5,-Trimethyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 2613.54 1.59 0.99 0.24 0.25 1,2,4, Trimethyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 11716.21 10.34 6.34 2.12 1.57 sec-butyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL 124.27 BDL BDL BDL BDL Straight Chain Alkanes Decane Ug/L 0.66 0.66 186.97 0.63 0.53 0.55 0.52 Undecane Ug/L 30.66 30.58 9262.88 29.24 24.97 26.26 25.45 Dodecane Ug/L 0.65 0.8 2620.16 BDL 0.69 0.54 BDL Tridecane Ug/L 9.1 BDL 3038 BDL BDL BDL BDL Tetradecane Ug/L 1.78 1.99 5728.98 1.7 1.73 1.54 BDL Pentadecane Ug/L BDL BDL 7765.32 BDL BDL BDL BDL Hexadecane Ug/L 5.87 5.88 9644.93 6.36 5.17 5.66 BDL Heptadecane Ug/L BDL BDL 14255.53 BDL BDL 37.84 34.36 Octadecane Ug/L 4.86 5 9340.54 5.46 4.26 4.28 5.75 Nonadecane Ug/L 12.88 11.09 14762.63 16.55 9.98 11.31 11.41 Eicosane Ug/L 8.01 6.76 6536.68 8.52 5.76 8.07 7.46 Poly Aromatic HC's Naphthalene Ug/L BDL BDL 918.05 13.31 6.72 2.45 2.02 Chlorinated Alkenes
Cis-1,2 dichloro ethene Ug/L 37.15 BDL BDL 13.2 BDL BDL BDL trans-1,2, dichloro ethene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL 1.47 BDL BDL BDL Trichloro ethylene Ug/L 1.06 BDL BDL 1.33 BDL BDL BDL Tetrachloro ethylene Ug/L 7.2 BDL BDL 4.77 0.98 BDL BDL Methylene Chloride Ug/L BDL 0.33 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.21 Other compounds Styrene Ug/L BDL BDL 23357.6 BDL BDL BDL BDL Chloroform Ug/L BDL BDL BDL 0.7 1.15 0.76 BDL 1,2- dichloro propane Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.56 BDL 1,4-dichloro benzene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL
IITMadras Page 62
Table AIII 1 (contd): Concentration of Hydrocarbons in the Wells Sampled by IIT Well no/Compound Units 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Alkyl Benzene Benzene Ug/L 21.39 1.22 1.89 1.06 1644.32 BDL BDL 4814.28 Toluene Ug/L 6.52 4.23 6.1 3.81 5780.92 BDL BDL 32305.04 Ethyl Benzene Ug/L 0.74 0.52 0.72 BDL BDL BDL BDL 3544.06 m and p-Xylene Ug/L 3.96 1.52 2.12 1.25 BDL BDL BDL 9810.02 O-Xylene Ug/L 1.93 0.95 1.71 1.12 2754.58 BDL BDL 14196.88 Isopropyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1,3,5,-Trimethyl benzene Ug/L 4.2 0.19 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1003.62 1,2,4, Trimethyl benzene Ug/L 2.2 1.2 1.44 BDL BDL BDL BDL 4633.68 sec-butyl benzene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Straight Chain Alkanes Decane Ug/L 0.63 0.49 0.49 0.59 BDL BDL 0.37 BDL Undecane Ug/L 29.52 23.36 23.68 27.56 12495.85 4.83 2.86 13.61 Dodecane Ug/L 0.65 0.52 0.49 0.4 21575.9 0.38 0.36 7.06 Tridecane Ug/L BDL BDL BDL 11.5 35844.09 BDL BDL 6.39 Tetradecane Ug/L BDL 1.29 1.43 BDL 33731.79 0.96 BDL 17.45 Pentadecane Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL 49871.02 BDL BDL 24.84 Hexadecane Ug/L 6.55 5.04 5.35 6.4 53001.45 1.52 2.66 48.77 Heptadecane Ug/L 39.99 30.23 32.95 42.73 73618.65 BDL 6.75 BDL Octadecane Ug/L 6.98 4.57 4.05 6.85 45031.31 1.87 5.64 BDL Nonadecane Ug/L 13.06 9.95 11 12.51 74045.06 5.81 9.58 93.74 Eicosane Ug/L 8.77 6.41 6.33 9.63 28635.35 3.64 6 56.5 Poly Aromatic HC's Naphthalene Ug/L 1.61 1.65 1.26 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Chlorinated Alkenes
Cis-1,2 dichloro ethene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL trans-1,2, dichloro ethene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Trichloro ethylene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Tetrachloro ethylene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Methylene Chloride Ug/L BDL 3.47 0.86 0.86 10750 6307.24 1370.84 6184.26 Other compounds Styrene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 455.8 Chloroform Ug/L 3.22 BDL 2.11 2.63 BDL BDL BDL BDL 1,2- dichloro propane Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL 1,4-dichloro benzene Ug/L 0.14 0.69 BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL
BDL: Below Detectable Level.
IITMadras Page 63
TableAIII 2: Concentration of Dissolved Hydrocarbons in the Wells Sampled by BPCL
Well no/Compound Units 1 2 3 4 5 6 Alkyl Benzene Benzene Ug/L 5064.54 2720.18 3946.54 2162.9 2619.56 8332.54 Toluene Ug/L 13012.66 15460.22 53626.16 28912.34 12153.52 58901.4 Ethyl Benzene Ug/L 585.66 2506.9 7586.06 5253.74 4439.32 10849.76 m and p-Xylene Ug/L 3307.56 12026.24 17417.58 10653.68 11207.52 23752.34 O-Xylene Ug/L 3490.74 11446.6 17086.48 10396.54 11573.02 20440.48 Straight Chain Alkanes Octane Ug/L 3840.78 4288.66 1457.63 8582.41 7711.34 8344.72 Nonane Ug/L BDL BDL 285.84 152.35 BDL 418.07 Decane Ug/L 157.26 199.98 1585.29 863.2 319.65 1902.18 Undecane Ug/L 465.5 395.98 1750.26 1618.46 678.82 3379.62 Dodecane Ug/L 978.79 785.96 3424.52 1945.36 1259.93 4471.35 Tridecane Ug/L 1446.09 292.98 524.74 928.67 409.56 1424.73 Tetradecane Ug/L 1318.95 950.26 6306.65 4123.85 3946.39 17691.81 Pentadecane Ug/L 1852.1 1641.48 1905.06 3978.37 2136.66 11318.27 Hexadecane Ug/L 1824.94 1688.92 3583.89 4655.78 2267.41 10240.17 Heptadecane Ug/L 1852.89 1608.79 3382.82 4765.09 2436.45 9753.62 Octadecane Ug/L 1577.34 1591.24 3203.82 3850.51 1807.1 7583.13 Nonadecane Ug/L 2472.11 2253.53 5464.11 6093.37 2891.44 11182.69 Eicosane Ug/L 1328.56 1192.78 2402.52 3188.97 1534.89 5807.93 Poly Aromatic HC's Naphthalene Ug/L 131.58 967.5 1831.8 1486.08 1684.74 1829.22 phenanthrene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL pyrene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL BDL BDL Benzo (a) Pyrene Ug/L BDL 0.5 BDL 0.32 0.26 0.43 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene Ug/L BDL 0.18 BDL BDL BDL 0.12 Benzo(ghi)perylene Ug/L 0.12 0.23 BDL 0.16 0.1 0.17
IITMadras Page 64
TableAIII 2 (cont): Concentration of Dissolved Hydrocarbons in the Wells Sampled by BPCL
Well no/Compound Units 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Alkyl Benzene Benzene Ug/L 3582.76 2405.42 BDL BDL 10970.16 8071.1 16688.3 Toluene Ug/L 4865.02 13493.4 59.34 10.32 18702.42 34894.5 84345.36 Ethyl Benzene Ug/L 153.08 868.6 8.6 1.72 1308.06 4277.64 16082 m and p-Xylene Ug/L 2052.82 12137.18 116.96 34.4 1911.78 14008.54 36132.9 O-Xylene Ug/L 2481.1 13118.44 99.76 24.08 2593.76 12945.58 30958.28 Straight Chain Alkanes Octane Ug/L 2250.63 2364.78 2677.71 1469.3 2633.71 4393.95 3407.26 Nonane Ug/L BDL 569.98 BDL BDL BDL 451.13 1268.39 Decane Ug/L 148.96 113.16 70.45 0.81 88.89 1608.61 1934.02 Undecane Ug/L 296.24 1711.14 1375.82 1374.36 1580.57 3033.34 2430.51 Dodecane Ug/L 796.5 2054.94 83.25 98.48 111.29 3905.96 2702.15 Tridecane Ug/L 2.96 723.88 211.21 144.86 262.37 1265.01 892.95 Tetradecane Ug/L 1482.52 3841.46 98.53 113.27 125.79 12265.47 8054.52 Pentadecane Ug/L 1404.87 3684.83 707.2 792.82 1153.09 6862.98 4180.48 Hexadecane Ug/L 1829.65 3588.83 149.22 215.1 296.51 6479.64 3838.9 Heptadecane Ug/L 1826.44 3643.43 147.75 220.64 275.97 6708.01 3714.35 Octadecane Ug/L 1359.02 3295.58 120.95 17.7 265.15 5253.24 2876.23 Nonadecane Ug/L 2318.44 5120.25 215.77 354.42 354.72 7866.7 4987.22 Eicosane Ug/L 1189.01 2657.73 108.92 175.57 223.28 4055.75 2577.87 Poly Aromatic HC's Naphthalene Ug/L 371.52 1543.7 200.38 54.18 67.94 781.74 2016.7 phenanthrene Ug/L BDL BDL 2.55 0.52 0.16 BDL BDL pyrene Ug/L BDL BDL 0.93 0.15 BDL BDL BDL Benzo (a) Pyrene Ug/L 0.39 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.4 0.28 Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene Ug/L 0.1 BDL BDL BDL BDL 0.1 0.25 Benzo(ghi)perylene Ug/L 0.16 0.1 BDL BDL BDL 0.2 0.4
IITMadras Page 65
TableAIII 2 ( cont): Concentration of Dissolved Hydrocarbons in the Wells Sampled
by BPCL
Well no/Compound Units 14 15 16 17 18 Alkyl Benzene Benzene Ug/L 3787.44 15322.62 14970.02 88.58 3.44 Toluene Ug/L 18017 49017.42 124993.26 743.9 149.64 Ethyl Benzene Ug/L 1837.82 2982.48 41372.02 183.18 46.44 m and p-Xylene Ug/L 12311.76 8395.32 67933.12 496.22 121.26 O-Xylene Ug/L 11524.86 8016.06 78264.3 370.66 64.6 Straight Chain Alkanes Octane Ug/L 4066.93 4660.34 3535.76 4068.81 6629.15 Nonane Ug/L 568.78 633.07 375.98 BDL BDL Decane Ug/L 1128.07 1794.63 666.62 81.58 66.12 Undecane Ug/L 1580.93 3387.96 735.7 20.88 3891.63 Dodecane Ug/L 2043.32 4171.72 983.31 112.01 93.88 Tridecane Ug/L 735.36 1272.83 329.54 251.29 1094.71 Tetradecane Ug/L 5357.07 11206.5 1419.54 187.46 146.77 Pentadecane Ug/L 3009.38 6753.25 1060.55 1017.61 1858.71 Hexadecane Ug/L 585.37 6761.6 1537.34 318.94 405.78 Heptadecane Ug/L 3262.78 7068.14 1664.47 345.17 433.71 Octadecane Ug/L 2354.95 5416.03 1530.34 259.21 302.7 Nonadecane Ug/L 3986.23 8227.51 2154.03 504.82 478.82 Eicosane Ug/L 1978.16 4304.06 1108.71 254.03 275.18 Poly Aromatic HC's Naphthalene Ug/L 1000.18 612.32 5892.72 408.5 98.9 phenanthrene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL 2.94 0.67 pyrene Ug/L BDL BDL BDL 1.36 0.34 Benzo (a) Pyrene Ug/L 0.15 BDL BDL BDL BDL Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene Ug/L 0.07 BDL BDL BDL BDL Benzo(ghi)perylene Ug/L 0.14 BDL 0.08 BDL BDL