30# 5S990e^ 3S:ei L \ / l % 3 . ^

TO: Sltiiiii Curiin, RemefllRl ?rrj(irr Kanager RsCion 7

FROM,' A U o T, Kazsella. Geophysicist Aquatic and Subsurface Monitoring Branch

SUBJECT; Beview of Ces hoinea TCS geophysical proposal

My major concern 1» that tba purpoea oC the survey le not nere clearly

IdaQtifiad. 2s it to locate buried dcuiu and an inorganic contatnlnant plume?

The depths, lateral extents and the smallest target that one is vllllng to

grid may be too oourca to idatttlCy vhethar a anall enonaly exists. The attached

papQr suggests th6t vith 20 foot apacin;;^, a single 55 gal- drum vill probably

ba niased. Vbether larger anonaXies can be identified vill depend upon the

background cultural noise. Tberefr>ie, ili« Wckgroimd cultural noise for both

tliti GM und nxgneiometer surveys should b« ld«r.tiCi«d at tht beginning o t the

«urvey«. this cultural noise in turn may dictate the spaclngs betveen data

pcints. It should be specified vhether the EH31 data vill be recorded Cor

botri the in-phase and out-of-phase components and the orientation ciT the

dipoles should be indicated. Vlll i1i«i Gn31 Instrument be noniiored betveen

(he recorded station locations? Vhai ahalysls vill be perfomed on tbe

EM and RagnetoiiQter data? This should be clarified. Here details on vha;

t v p f t e £ m&rAB t ranct-r-.v- . . , t , r f . . y w-l t l >..- I , , . I >.•) t - l i v u U !,..• I i j d iu t a ,wwa . Tl.««. i n ,

It should be indicated vhether a total field or cninpon tit «ysten v l l l be used.

Vlll data be acquired In & ntnclienc array? Tbe heiaht of th« o nAiNr cVusiiirl Kn

Itidicpted, It should b« Indicated hov corrections for the diurnal ir.agnetic

variations v i l l be nade.

AttaL'b.'iiiiiu

30221288

Superfund

80» 3S9see^ 3S!ei ^1/^0

1982 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILLS CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

April 19-22, 1*302 Milwaukee, Wisconsin

V ' BUHEAL' rt= EXl»LOSIVE5

CHii.MlCAl M^NJMCTURCRS ASSOCIATION

(ffi] UMTf i ; STAItS COAST GUARD

LN.TCD SIA TES fSVIRONMENrAL HrtQTECTION Af^eNf-Y

AUii.ttaii \ tc i r ,bfy

Airerican ItiMitjtr. <»f C U T I c*l ktsIrM'} AT»fU:jn Petfokum InstiUirf Amer'C':n R.'<flw3y tnglrc<'iri« ASS<M latlor AncicoD Wateiv^HV! Upcrators AHOcljtici of Amerlcai ft<*ilroad$ ."rde'iil Fm»rq»ncy MiraKwne.U Aj{«r>cy Ha:arc^oj) Mitctiixlt .4dt«iiof/ Cojocil Inteirarionai A.isotMtcj of Fl-w Clwefa Mucei iiN Tranxportation Cjreau Njtionol Tank TMH !f Carrle't Spill CoiM.'ol AMOciecloi: tti Atie;it:s

^ U 3S9£0£^ SSSGI l \ / l ^

USE OV .HOHDEBTRUCTT^ TESTINO METHODS TO DBTHCT AMD LOC ATK HURIHO COMTAINgaa V E R i m n RY GROUND I'KUTH MBAfiUREM&H'n

Arthur B> Lonl, Jr . , Hcmoev Tiyagi, aober t M, Koernsr, John 3. BowdeK, <Joi\n B. Sankey a.-id Staiiley CatMii

l><partm«nt8 o ! d r Q Bnzunserine aiwl PhyeiM T i m r e i o a i v e n i t y

Pni:><ieip(iLa« PA 19104

ABSTRACT

A gcudy w u undertaiten t s con-ipaid iE9v«n nonde-5l?i:Bt>ve teat lns (!3DT1 '.«RhnlTii63 n.\ a Sinfle f i s ld aite where we l:>it] previously placed s prcswi l je*; d b t r i t n U o u 3f 6upi<id jr.vta'. Add p|«;t lc co(it«ii ie;4. Thfl s i te aon-sietcd of « . ' ek l i ve ly ui i i for-n l a rdy sell ef \tiw water cantent anU :«[)rri;»itc«<] nearly idcei eonditlona for tht i MRts, The results i iy i leatc U i t l the ma l a l tlRt^.r-rnp, vary ;ow frcqu«.riey-«letncuiii)i j{rBtlc, magnstc-nelar end irourid*pi:obi:nj F H I ' M taehniqufis arc oE d e f i r l t e •yulue in (lR!iri>4itliig tho crums, Cont inusu; litav* mir.rowave I d Q h n i Q : ! ^ wr.r f i IAM<4 vijoc4k-w/b^ n^/ i oc' .atr . i^ ^•'ttto\iK't^J^^

And electr ical r w i s t i v U y were tintucacaaful fo r this

iKTRoyutmoN T h t ; a Hr<> « l ;mat«<] to ba 30,000 lo '-[I.DOO ttxist-

Ir.g dump sitee in the 'J f i i lsd 3ta:64 ur.ninlnlng various unauntf and types ut Unr.aKWs 1^14^11$. P i r t he r -•ncrs, many net. sito£ are d i s o v e r s d 3r< a r<:|;iiinr ttasu, On« «( the f i ra t p ieom of InriX'Nitt ion needed in Iho C I M H U P process b l l w physloal ext«nt gf ths dvmp i i t e a i i t liiH pRsiiiurfC poUiit«d area. This is v«iy i i ' t \ -•?ult to i o f h e n t>.o Iwzordoi.s TitilKrifll<; 4r4 XiPieC fcciCilbi -J".e fTourd 5U:'tau»!. A l\Ufr,ty;r o ! jaophysiicsl Ot nohdeatiujUvfi resting (.NirD tccmiquea c^uid bu t.^sd in x^& d<jt«C!ti<n proecas, MRUJI uf Ities^ nave !)««n elcbcrutsd or dt a pi-kiviciii^ <!on.'crance in this scries lT.nr<1. »t nl- , «()*1), r u r W i « i i u n ; , KM; t t i t O l CO lOtdLa hiir]!>.'i Kn ia iners cloc haa been revivwf.i l in a ragout ?uhliCQ«lon (Lord, et a).. iSB ln l .

tvhile yertqin of tnnsi -mcthodi show de f i n i i t p.'n/n.'se, thoy .1SV9 never beer, ' janpsruc :v cne snot.'w." bv t h « Hf.mCi i n t e f f t y n t n r . > • ! . . " ^ I - «J««. wis-... J . .......1 rpiitn • Jr> " M »vi^iiMh>. T>.e j«ud j VV I f j J«)ac:ltea liuFr,i>, IUM urdcrtAkwi W l i i . ! ^ 4(1 LilCy Cni5 OL^lOJK TueO.

Xiei,'arding l i i r i tat ior iA of tht: silndy, I t shcJld be noted the: ihe met.' iofj to d * dcso.'ibed ara »ti-ict]y j l t ys lM l Crfit.n<ip |.>iBr. c t ien ionU, ths nunber c t buried • *r>Mi.i,i< sLo iv ia t iv« iv lew Ri-ir>|>»i'M<i.. t£u.ui Mt'iJal •i*A Ar.J 'V,.. . . : i . l i . - . - * • ....J •-...- » . . ^v»»icva of A ijOil-SHlur^ted, uYlform dep:>sit i»f Jard. Th!» I.H <Jvi«i;t.ion, rccoivirK :KM-er, aJid ULernl d^ceeclon s t n s h tlMlty, ccu lcbe inor« uriaii:)>ie;'i')i:<ly d«tar(nirad.

r» i ;owin0 i» « c«90rtp(joi» Ct the sf ivt i i NHT teeh-

nlt^uts iLsvi ar.n details 7f ttve actkiul s i t« . speciTiR resul'js ftr« given end compured fuv one nf tne many drum conlisurat icr is HVNlii<(tM, T iK p a ^ r Is sumi ta -rlseO kiiu) nnrn i j i ied by a table o l ^ r t i n e n t n p s b l l l l i e ^ • j :d Umitatlons o l anah of the teven rnetlKdii tc r I > M <tac\,avi (SOn/igu'dtiorv; t v t l m i n d .

DSSCRJEniOH OP JUPERUENTAL .METHODS

Thft various NDT rr.etiiods w e d WBFB w l s m i c ra / rac t ion , electr ical res ls t l t i t y , ^ w m t proCio^ radar, coriiirmous ivave -nlrtTowaves, n « t a i detcc tor i very Jow fri»(JienCV-<leClr6l>lrtZli»Ti(^. •rr f r.>«fr>«n.iinin".. Thcr? oer ta i r t y ere other meij^,ijil«3 however, ]'.tera;urB aeatehen ineilccti! l lmt t^ese seven are the noat U)<eiy to t i i tH pnRltlvc res i i l t i .

Beismle Refract ion (SR): TitiH i. a stanjare geo-phy^iisal method iii whichi 4.1 irr ipj isd is applied to (he ZICUDU HPft tne t ime to reEc^ a t rensd j c t r is nitftctured tor varyinpf tranediicer-ko-irr.pvlse Jis"jnci>s. The tiir.e is p lot ted &a H fiiriOlion « l 'll'star.ee, t f th€:e is a we l l -de i j iwu liiyp.r oer.eath tha syrfoce. a charactHriHiis h rwK in the curve is f o u r J f rom w l t i d i ihR aeprn to «ia i j iysr can be determlnwJ.

This ii:eLliar1 tns not b«en used t3 detect S.I IHII (:hj«[!t5, but is widely uied in o i l a.id niLncnvl proajMct-ing, A fcreat deui .yt ccininprolal e^uii>fnant ie available to c e i ' t j n i ' SR land I M oiosely re lated techiiuj'.ie c t .5Rl.srni3 rof leol ion) miMurencBii ts, Tl ias* rjohniques are deec.'ibed in a l l staridB;0 seofj-.yeics texts Je.g., OcDrlr , 1973, and Ornnt and K^est. I 9 ( ! i l .

K leot r ica l Rcsi^ t lT i ly (ERh Tnis ge.-^nysjcai m«thod applies e j r r e n t lo the ground I t i r o u ^ elec­trodes, i ts r^:*r9tlon dapenoa cn the fac : thflt t i iy 3ij|i.Mirf«ce var ia l ian in con<fjct iv i ty sdiKrs t h * fo."n Qt the ou;ront f low wiff j /n UIM c f l r i i i , Taepsfore, f iP . i l .L . iL . , . . , .^ , . Ul r ' t i^. ,TlC i::vllMlLlttJ \K nfr* '* f^rfn I ! l« atKI'ee to Wiligh Xtte COtfirili/iT m#««mia<l &t tI j ,- n.irtae* ia a f fec ted dopQivJs 0,-1 the slzt>^ shfip«, lo iu t io r . and £ l « : -t r i ca ! resist iv i ty nf the subsjrfaee naaa. I t is, t lmre' i^re, ooj^ibie (3 obtoin infocmattoi i nhcut tl^e

irii* metrtoa )g ueed oxtcr.gively m oil and mineral prospooliiic'i but has not bpt»ii W I ' IP IH lu^r* ' " *i..,ii»— raeniiM'ir.^ For w i a i i L*«,im,i A j w j j i i , i f jcro are /r.ary cori imtfe-i*! souroen of etn ipmont to choose ' i x m ar.d the techriKllia U jl l ftcv***-! Jr, 0.11 olurKl/r^ g«v^l>yiU'» te.<<tSi The authors l uv« KurvRye.l the use of ES opeeif-

:_r:_J!.r_^*: 133

« f 5S9£0£;^ ££••£! <^u^0

iQfi^^l 2 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILLS CONPERENCE

Ieally In the ho«ardous materials area (Lord, et al.. Site DetaUs i981b).

Ground Probing Radar (OPRh A few cycles of electromagnetic radiation (100 MHz to 900 MHz) are sent into the ground from a (uglily damped antenna. A reflection occurs when a medium of different dielectric constant is encountered. The time it takes for the pulse to travel down and back gives an indication of the depth of the object. Lateral surveying gives an Indication of the spatial extent of the objects. Several systems are commercially available. See Cook (1972, 1974), Moray (1974), Rosetta (1977), Chan, ct al. (1979), and Lord 098le) for further details.

Continuous Wave Miorowave (CWM): Quite similar to ground probing radar except that a continuous wave (CW) is used. The CW is swept in frequency and the wave from the ground surface and the wave from a subsurface reflection interfere with each other. The spacing (in frequency) between interference maxima ( or minima) as the frequency is swept gives the depth of the reflecting surface. Some systems of this type are in an advanced researcli stage. However, they are not avail­able commercially as far as the authors are aware. See Lundlen (1972), Koerner, et_al^ (1978), Ellerbruch and Adams (1974), and Lord, et _al._ (I98lc) for further de­tails. ^ ^ Metal Detector (MD) and Very Low Frequency

^^womagnetic (VLF'EM): The operating principle of ^ ^ B t w o instruments is essentially the same, so they ^ r b^ discussed together. (The metal detector is sometimes called a pipe locat(jr ur eddy ourreat meth­od). These are both instruments with two coils, whereas many of the less expensive metal detectors are single coil/inductance change instruments,

A transmit coil generates an electromagnetic field and a receiving coil in the vicinity picks up the resulting field. Some of the field arrives via the air and some via the subsurface material. The field ttirough the air is essentially constant for a given transmitter-receiver

The site where the container:; were buried was an abandoned sand quarry which was left in a level condi­tion free of all vegetation ond miscellaneous construc­tion debris. Ko pipelines, cables or overhead wires were within 1,000 ft. of the site. The closest road was also 1,000 ft. from the site; thus, background noise from man-made objects was minimal.

Disturbed and undisturbed soil samples indicated that the site consisted of a very uniform, poorly-graded sand (specific gravity of 2.65, effective size of 0.18 mm, and coefficient of uniformity of 3.4). Its average in,sit_u density is 101 PCF (porosity of 0.40), which results in a relative density of 73 percent.

For the purposes oif this study, it is Important to note that the in situ water content is only 2 percent, which corresponds to a degree of saturation of 8 per­cent; i.e., the sand is almost dry. The water table at the site was estimated to be 20 ft. deeper than the ground surface and the sand, with essentially no capil­lary zone, proved to be nearly ideal for the tests.

The containers were placed in hand-excavated and equipment-excavated holes varying from 1 ft. to 14 ft. in depth. Containers placed in the excavations varied in size from 2 gallons to S5 gallons and were made from both steel and plastic. The container burial patterns were as follows;

^m i»n*i»«'*i^wn»w«

distance but the field arriving from the subsurface material depends on the subsurface electrical conduc­tivity and magnetic permeability, If a conducting body is present in the subsurface material between the two coils, the total detected field is altered and the anomaly noted.

The methods are discussed In two reports by the authors (Lord, et al. I981d, I981e), Many such devices are commercialjfy a'vaiiable.

Magnetometer (MA): A magnetometer meosiires minute changes in the earth's magnetic field. Any magnetic object, e.g., an iron ore deposit or a buried steel object, will alter the earth's magnetic field locally and thus can potentially be detected. The most common magnetometer today uses proton nuclear magnetic resonance. The nuclear spin of the proton processes at a frequency which is linearly proportional to the total magnetic field at the nucleus. If the total magnetic •field changes due to an anomaly, the precession fre-" ency change can be read very accurately, and hence

e magnetic field change determined precisely. Magnetometers are used a great deal and several

geoprospectlng types are commercially available. Magnetometry is discussed in general in all geophysics 16XU> and in one of a series of reports by the authors aord.etaly 1981f),

Four steel containers (2, 5, 30, 55 gallons) buried at constont depths of 3.5 ft. (i.e, 3.5 ft. of soil cover) Four 30-gaUon steel eontainers buried at 1 ft., 3 ft., 6 ft, and 11 ft. depths

Four 40-gaIlon plastic containers buried at 1 ft., 3 ft., 8 ft. and 11 ft depths

Four 55-gallon steel containers buried at 4,5 ft. depth in two groups, one by itself, and the other three side by side

Three 30-gaUon steel containers buried at 3 ft depth, but at different orientations, i.e., 0", 45', 90*

Two plastic containers buried at 2 ft. depth, one filled with fresh water, the other filled with salt water

A random burial site approximately 12 ft. x 12 ft. x S ft, deep, which was filled with six steel drums and two plastic drums of various sizes and a few steel plates of various sizes. (This pattern was called the "Trash dump.")

. , j . J u f -I • —" —

All patterns were separated by sufficient distance so that interaction between them was relatively unlike­ly, and within each pattern sufficient distance was allowed for the same reason.

RESULTS

Due to the large size of the study, only one pat­tern will be described fully. Others will be referred to in a general table to follow. The particular pattern to bc discussed consists of four 55-gallon steel containers placed empty and on their sides in two groups. One

V

50tt SS9S0£^

container was placed by itself, and the other three touching one another and located 16 ft, from the first-The tops of the containers were placed 4.S ft, beneath the surface and backfilled with the same sand that was taken from the excavation. The results of the seven NDT methods are presented below.

Figure 1 shows the results of a seismic refraction survey. A commercially-available, geotechnical engi­neering type instrument was used. Figure Ua) Indicates a SR survey where no buried drums were present. Figure 1(b) shows the survey over the site of the four buried containers. It is observed that no characteristic features occur In the vicinity of the drums and that the two curves are essentially the same.

The data in Figure 2 are from the electrical resistivity survey using a conventional, commercially-available instrument. The very large dip in conductivity at 44 ft. is due to a very small dry gully where water

60

V\ 48

8 tu SQ 36 si

24

12

10 20 SO

SPACING (FEET)

ca)

40 50

50

8 ° :j JO

§ 20

k 10

g JU«-

0 10 20 30 40 50

SPACING (FEET)

Figure 1. Seismic refraction survey response; (a) no drums present, (b) foufC^um pattern (one plus three)

9S!£I 1 \ / IQ

NOT METHODS 187

«;? 7.0 K

WENNER ARRAY

f i

1 M 1

10 20 30 40 50

POSITION OF Ci ELECTRODE (FEET)

Figure 2. EleetriciUi resistivity sif vey response over the four-drum pattern

runs during rainstorms. Again no characteristic struc­ture is preaent near the location of the four buried drums,

Figure 3 shows ground probing radar scans using a commercially-available instrument. The characteristic signatures of cylindrical reflectors are easily seen, The depths are read as 4 and 4,5 feet, very close to the actual depth,

The continuous wave microwave results are shown in Figure 4, The unit used has been developed at Drexel University (Koerner, e^aL, 1978), There are anomalies at the approximate location of the drums, but in both cases the calculated depths are significantly less than the actual depths.

Figure 5 shows the metal detector results using a sophisticated commercial unit. The drums were easily detected above background noise level, but no depths can be estimated using this technique.

Figure 6 gives the results of the very low fre­quency-electromagnetic scan using a high-quality commercial unit. The drums are very easily detected and located, even when the scans are not directly taken over the burled containers. No depths can be deter­mined using this technique.

The results of the magnetometer scans are indi­cated in Figure 7. A commercially-available proton precession unit was employed. Again the drums are easily detected and located, even when the scans are displaced laterally from the center line of the drums. No depth.s can be determined using this technique.

Due to paper length limitations, only the general­ized results of the other container patterns are pre­sented (Table 1). By necessity, they are presented on a qualitative basis but the table gives an idea of the effectiveness of each NDT method under each test pattern condition.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Limited space precludes any lengthy discussion

^

£0# 3e9S0£^ ^SJSI l \ / l %

c

^^^ 3£9S0£^ ^ S : £ I ^ 1 / ^ 0

' #

82 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILLS CONFERENCE

DEPTH (FEET) '«

14

12

S 10

r

^ " ^ S l'••T^"^f-•.;:'//'« s

F i g t r e 3 . Qroiind probing r a d a r r e s td t s over t h e to i t t -(kum p a t t e r n

he re , so t he resul ts from the e n t i r e s tudy a r e p re sen t ed as concisely as possible in Table 2. Only ground probing radar , m e t a l d e t e c t o r , very low f r e q u e n c y - e l e c t r o m a g ­ne t ic and magne tomer methods a r e ment ioned s ince cont inuous wave microwave wa.* of marginal use and seismic and res is t iv i ty methods were of no use.

The major conclusions with regard to NDT use for buried conta iner de tec t ion and loca t ion can be s t a t e d as follows:

i . The me ta l de t ec to r is very inexpensive , easy t o use and qui te sensi t ive to m e t a l d rums . Ce r t a in ly it Should be t he first N D T ins t rumen t used a t any s i t e which is suspec ted to have m e t a l drums.

j i f t c 1 - 1 - J J I - 1 -

0 4 B 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 POSITION OF ANTENNAE I FEET)

F igure 4. Cont inuous wave mic rowave resu l t s for t h e four-dl 'um piUttern

STRONG

i

ff WEAK

ZERO MA. 10 20

POSITION (FEET) 30

Figu re $. Meta l d e t e c t o r r e s u l t s over t he four-drum p a t t e r n

2, Magne tome te r and VLF-EM both have excel lent sensi t iv i ty for s tee l d rums . VLF-EM also will work well with any m e t a l d rum, while the m a g n e t o m e t e r obviously works only for drums made from magnet ic m a t e r i a l .

3. GPR is the only technique which will d e t e c t plast ic drums (as well as meta l ) and also give the depth of the buried ob jec t . It has d e t e c t e d a 30-gallon s tee l drum a t U f t . of sand cove r .

4, CW microwave appears to be of marginal value until such t ime as commerc ia l ly made ins t ruments are avai lable .

5. Convent ional se ismic re f rac t ion and e lec t r ica l res i s t iv i ty a r e of l i t t l e use .

/

£0# 5 S 9 e 0 e ^ 8S:£I ^U^Q

NOT METHODS 199

S O C ­

IO iO

Dnf*wet (FTI

Figure 6. Very low frequency-electromagnetie scans over the four-<^um pattern

10 10 QlSTAHCf / i f l

Figure 7. Magnetometer scans over the four-d-utn pattern

In concluding, it should be mentioned that the above study was conducted under near ideal conditions in relatively dry sandy soil. The next phase of the work is to use the same seven NDT methods on similar buried container patterns in saturated fine-grained soils (silts

Table 1. Summary of results from all other patterns

*""""~--wiJettiod Pattern """—~..

STEEL PRUMS (EMPTy)

Various Depths (30 gAl.)

Varloua Sizes (55, 30, 5. 2 gal. -3.5' cover)

Various Orlentiitions (in 3' cover)

PLASTIC DRUMS

Vavioua Depths (40 gal. empty)

Various Concents

(2' cover) Salt Vlater

(2' cover) Preeh Water

TRASH DUMP

Selaiclc

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Resistivity

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

GPR

detected all

detected ell

ot ly good to axis o l drum

only et .1'

ouch bet­ter than empty

much bet­ter then Ctfpty

locates excevatlon bound.irles

CW-u Wave

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Metal Detector

detected all but 10' deep

detected all

detected all

X

X

X

detected well

VLF-EM

detected all but 10' deep

detected all

detected all

only at 1'

X

X

detected well

Mflgnetometer

detected all

detected all

detected all

X

X

X

detected veil

Note; "X" suggeste that the netliod ueod la of l i t t l e or no value in this particular eituation

<

90# SS9£0£^ 6S:£l ^r/Z0

1982 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL SPILLS CONFERENCe

Table 2. Summary of results of various HPT methods

METHOD

Depth Detection

Axial Resolu­tion

Lateral Scan Sensitivity

Soil Couditlon Sensitivity

Seneltlvlty to Orientation of Drum

St-ze of Drum Sensitivity

.•aensitivlty to Contents of Drum

GPR St Pl

to 10'

-10'

Poor I

Very

Very

to 3'

-10'

Poor

Very

Very

Metal Detector

SC

I

Moderate Moderates

Ease of Duptoyment

Data Interpre­tation

Ejcpenise of Equipment

Major Draw­backs

Major Advantagee

Hone Liquid filled best

Moderate

Ea&y

-$40,000

Cost

Need not bc mecal-Detertnines ueptli

t o 10 '

-A '

Cood

Good

Good

Pa i r

Wone

VLF-EM St Pl

to 6 '

- 1 0 '

to 1'

Maftnetoitieter St

Excellent

Good

Very Easy

Very Eaey

?300-500

Does not work on plastic

Sensitive and very low cost

Good

Fair

Very little

to 10'

-10'

Excellent

Insensi­tive

Good

Good

Very little

Eawy

Easy

«$8000

High Coet Very limited on plastic

Very sensi­tive

Very Efiay

Easy

$3000-5000

only works on majjnecic materials

Very sensi­tive

1. Steel drum 2. Plastic drum

^ i f

^PL

and clays) to see if the conclusions presented in this paper hold.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank I3ernie Sharpe and Steve Sahns for allowing us access to the site and pro­viding equipment and logistical support. Their help was indispensable. Thanks are also due to the Environmental Totection Agency Municipal/Environmental Research aboratory in Edison, New Jersey, for financial support

under Cooperative Agreement No. CR80777710. The encouragement of our project officer, John E, Brugger was, as usual, most helpful.

RBPEREHCES

Chan, L. C , D. L. Moffat and L. Peters, Jr., 1979, A characterization of subsurface radar targets. Proceed­ings of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engi­neers, va7i gp991-100Q.

Cook, J. C., 1972, Seeing through rock with radar, Proceedings of the North American Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conference, pp89-10l.

Cook, J. C , 1974. Ground probing radar. Proceedings of Symposium on Subsurface Exploration Underground texcavation and Heavy Construction, ppi72-174, Ameri-can Society of Civil Engineers,

f

^0# SS^SQC^ 6 S ! e i ^1/^:0

NDT METHODS 191

Dobrin, M. B., 1976, Introduction to Geophysical Pro­specting. McGraw-Hill, New York,

Ellerbruch, D, A. and J, W. Adams, 1974. Microwave Measurement of Conl Layer Thickness. Report NBSIR 74-387, National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, Colorado.

Grant, r . S. and G, F, Vlent, 1966. Interpretation Theory in Applied Geophysics. McGraw-Hill, New York,

Koerner, R. M., A. E. Lord, Jr., T. A. Okrasinski and J .S . Reif, 1979. Detection of seepage and subsurface flow of liquids by microwave Interference metiiods. Proceedings of the Conference on Control of Hazardous Material SpillSj pp287-292.

Lord, A. E., Jr., S. D. Tyagi and R. M. Koerner, 1980. Nondestructive testing (NDT) methods applied to envi­ronmental problems involving hazardous material spills. Proceedings of 1980 Conference on Control.of Hazardous Material Spills, ppi74-179.

Lord, A. E., Jr., R. M. Koerner and F. J, Freestone, l98la. The identification and location of buried con­tainers via nondestructive testing methods. Journal of Hazardous Materials (in press).

Lord, A. E., Jr., S, Cohen and R, M. Koerner, 198lb. Use of Electrical Resistivity Measurements as a Possi­ble NDT Method Applied to Hazardous Material Spill Problems, Report 10 to U. S. Environmental Proteetion Agency, Industrial/Environmental Research Laboratory, Oil and Hazardous Material Spills Branch, Edison, New Jersey on Cooperative Agreement No. CR80777710, August IS, 1981 (available on request).

Lord, A. E., Jr., S. D. Tyagi and R, M. Koerner, 1981c. Use of Ground Probing Radar and CW Microwave Meas­urements as Possible NDT Methods Applied to Hazard­

ous Material Spill Problems. Report 13 to EPA, Edison New Jersey, on Cooperative Agreement CR80777710, October 1, 1981 (available on request).

Lord, A. E,, Jr., S. D. Tyagi and R. M. Koerner, I98ld. Use of Eddy Currents as a Potential NDT Method Ap­plied to Hazardous Material Spill Problems Report 2 to EPA on Cooperative Agreement CR80777710, January 6, 1981 (available on request).

Lord, A. E., Jr., S. D. Tyagi and R. M. Koerner, 1981e. Use of Very Low Frequency-Electromagnetic (VLF-EM) Measurements as a possible NDT Method Applied to Hazardous Material Spill Problems. Report 8 to EPA on Cooperative Agreement CR80777710, July 4, 1981 (available on request).

Lord, A. E,, Jr., S. D. Tyagi and R. M, Koerner, 198If. Use of Proton Precession Magnetometer as a Potential NDT Method Applied to Hazardous Material Spill Prob­lems. Report 4 to EPA on Cooperative Agreement CR80777710, February 20, 1981 (available on request).

Lundien, J. R., 1972. Determining Presence, Thickness and Electrical Properties of Stratified Media Using Swept Frequency Radar, Technical Report M-72-4. U. S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

Morey, R. M., 1974. Continuous subsurface profiling by impulse radar. Proceedings of Symposium on Subsurface Exploration for Underground Excavation and Heavy Construction, Engineers.

pp213-232. American Society of Civil

Rosetta, J. V., 1977. Detection of subsurface cavities by ground probing radar. Proceedings of Symposium on Detection of Subsurface Caviti^, ppl20-l27. U. S. Army Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

/c

80# 3£9£0£ii 00!^| j/^0

TO: Glenn Curtis, Region 7

FROM: Reglna BochicchiO/ Desert Research Institute

DATE I July 5, 1989

REt Des Moines TCE

1^

As you requested, I have read over the document proposing a geophysical investigation of the south parking lot of Meredith Locust Street Property, prepared by ENVIRON Corporation. For your information, l am enclosing a report entitled "Guidelines for Geophysical Reports". This document was written for the State of California, and all references to registered geophysicists apply only to that state, as far as I know. As you can see, these guidelines specify items that should be found in a final report; however, I think that tbey also will give you a feel for what should be included in the work plan. In addition, I have specified a few more items that you should be aware of when reviewing the work plan.

In general, magnetometer and ground terrain conductivity surveys lend themselves to depth searches of buried metallic objects. In the case of the magnetometer, this metal must be ferrous (i.e. iron or steel). The maximum depth penetration of the ground terrain conductivity meter (EM-31) they plan on using is somewhat less than 20 feet, depending on the soil material and the amount of outside interference from surface metal and overhead power lines. The depth penetration of the magnetometer is very dependent on the area and the mass of the burled metal.

TARGET DEFINITION

As we discussed, one problem with this proposal is that it doesn't clearly delineate the nature (especially the estimated size, shape and depth) of the target. This being the case, it is Impossible to evaluate the appropriateness of the grid size for the magnetometer and terrain conductivity survey. According to our telephone conversation, I understand the targets are probably 55-gallon drums, buried no deeper than 15-20 feet, and they could be isolated or in masses. With this additional information, i would say that the proposed grid spaclngs of 10 to 20 feet are adequate for a reconnaissance survey, with the understanding that they will resurvey any "hot spots" using a denser grid pattern of 5 feet or less. It is important that the work plan address the nature of target and how its estimated size, shape and depth will influence the type of geophysical instruments used and the size of the grid.

CULTURAL INTERFERENCE

Magnetometer and EM-SI surveys are particularly susceptible to "cultural interference." This, can include power lines

/ /

60# 3S9e0£^ T0!t?T ^1/^0

(overhead or buried), railroad tracks, parked cars and trucks, and any other type of buried or surface metal. It also includes metallic belt buckles, jewelry, and to some extent, steel-toed boots. In addition, magnetic storms can interfere with the magnetometer readings. ENVIRON's proposal does mention this. However, they should address this issue in their work plan, indicating that the field crew will make sure their steel-toed boots have no adverse effect on the readings and that they will be otherwise free of metallic objects. They should also indicate how they will take diurnal (daily) variations into account for the magnetometer readings.

QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL (QA/QC)

The work plan should provide for QA/QC. At EMSL, our QA plans call for data quality objectives. These involve defining the target (as discussed above) and then explaining how the proposed instrumentation and survey plan has the accuracy, precision and repeatability to detect that target. Other aspects of QA/QC include;

- standard operating procedures (SOP's - they can reference the instruments' operation manual)

- calibration and maintenance procedures (they can reference the instruments' operation manual)

- repeating a certain percentage (5-10%) of meaBurements to assure repeatability

- establishing a base station. This is especially important for the magnetometer survey, so that diurnal variations can be taken into account.

FURTHER GEOPHYSICAL ASSISTANCE

Now its time for the sales pitch. The EMSL-Las Vegas Technology Support Center, under the direction Dr. Shelly Evans, can supply a limited amount of support, as in this instance. However, any support on a larger scale, such as review of data, site visits and on-site field work support, must be supported with regional funding through the Superfund Comprehensive Accomplishment Plan (SCAP). if you anticipate needing more extensive geophysical support from EMSL, please talk with your Superfund Branch Chief and the regional SCAP coordinator about programming some funds into the SCAP for geophysics. Regional funding sent to EMSL-LV also allows the region to benefit from a number of inter-Agency Agreements and Cooperative Agreements with academic and research organizations having geophysical expertise to meet your specific needs.

I hope that this information can be of use to you. if you have any further questions, please call me at FTS 545-2150.

AP

0I# 3S9e0£^ 30:l?l l \ / l ^

Enclosures

cc; Michael J. Sanderson, Region 7 Gale A. Wright, Region 7 Shelly Evans, EMSL-LV Aldo Mazzella, ENSL-LV Lary Jack, EMSL-LV Ken Scarbrough, EMSL-LV Phil Malley, LESC

13

n # 3S9S0£^ 30: i?I l \ / l %

NEW GUIDELINES Introduction

The fotkMMingGuidf rrne* for Ground-water InvtKigatiQn Report! tnd Guid«lln«i for CiO' phyikal R«portt u^tre prepared for tht bOArd t>y Ihe Profeuional Affairt Committte u in/ormalk)n dMumcnt i for licin««e*, public 19tr>cie(, and the public, All board guldelirwB Wf r« developed i i informaliQnal documenti enV and ar« nol corti idtf (d to be itandard ol prectie*.

The Kope o\ the Inveil isj i ion, the l e m * o/ the conlrad between lK« lieenM* and the elienl, and th* «vallabltity of fundi sr« conlrol' ling faclori for rrttny projtct i . In addition, vtiStiion in silt condiliont i l ar important factor in dtttrmining what ia appropriate and

necesMry for MCh projact *f>i what ihould «pp«ar in (he report.

In the text, tht committee has uaed " m u l l " and " ihould" and other phrases which apptar to martdaie thai licensee! are required to fol­low the guideltnei, The aulhorl U M these lermi to emphasize certain faetori for the report, but this format Is not required to be followed, Tht r tg i i t t red professionti i i in charge of Iht projtcl or inutstisalion and it i l that person'! rttponjibil ity to determine tht scope of (he inveil idtl ion based on the fac­tors mtnlioned in a /oregoir^U paragraph.

The most important initial requirement 'from ihe board's perspective i» lo Ivivt all geologic or gtophytical reports signed by a rtgisiercd professional to indici l t that pcr-l on ' i rtiponslbility for them.

GUIDELINES FOR GEOPHYSICAL REPORTS

I. INTRODUCTION

Tht foOowing guidclintt i r t l ugg t i t t d by the PreftiiionaJ Affairs Committee, S t i l t Board of Rtgit tr i t ion for Gtologists and Gtophysicisli, to assist those involvtd in tht prtpantiori of geophyticat reports, The guidt' lines r t p r t w n l prudent practice in the appli-cit ion of 3«ophysicBl mt lhodl to tn^int t r ing proiect* and to geophysical explorll ion, Th t i t tm i included in the formal should be con­sidered tn the prtparit ion of th« field and laboratorv work and for th* reports.

These gMidclint* art applicibit within the conltxt of prolecting Ihe public'* htal lh and *altty,*sp«cially where Ihe geophysical work i* r t la t td to projects conceming ground wa< I t r , gtolofltc or environmental hazards, con-siruclion, i n d othtr*. TT^ese guidelines are not intended or designed for project* related to mineral or energy expleraliorH.

Tht r tport* must contain information on tht purpoK and scope of the lurvey, T h t r t may b« phyiicat constrainli On the nature ot th* gtophysieal survey or the report, luch as physical cotutrainii of inaectuibilily or elitni-plactd constraint) on funds available or sur­vey methodi. Such constraints should be clearly idcntifitd in tht introduction to the report. If the geophytical rtport is apptndtd to another report, the geophyticil report ihould contain information or instructions as to how it should be used, Tht rtport ihould inclucit all basic data.

Although tht guidelines arc intended to be relatively complete, thty may not includt ctr-tain i l t nu that may develop in specific aur-v f y i . Conaequcntly, the geophysicist must uM h i l proftuioruJ judgment In providing perlinent information to make th t rtport aa compOe aa possible

n. RESPONSIBILTTY'OF SIGNATOR TO GEOPHYSICAL REPORTS

Interpretatien of geophysical data usually inwolwt* a knowtcdge of both geologic and

geophysical principtes. The limilalioru of Ihe Stophysical methods, data collecitd, a«*ump-l ioni , ind ambiguities of Interpretation muit also be known, Th« geophysical work should bt dont by or under the direct suptrvition of a regislertd giophyiicisi, who then Indicalet rcsponsiblliiy lor Ih* wori< by signing this report.

For many projects, geophysical work con-Ititutes a portion of the total investigation. Other regislered or certified profeuionals art involved m d , in such cases, Ihe final report may be signed by a geologist, enginterlng geologist, or cit/il engineer. For reports thai contain interpretation* Or conclusion* based on geophysical data, Ihe signelurt of the reg­istered geophysicist should alio bt included. That signature indicaies respontibilily for the $*0phy*lcil portion of the final report.

ID. GENERAL INFORMATION A. Each report should includt dtf ini t i

Statements on:

1. Purpose for which report was prepared end limitalioni plactd on invtsiigalion.

2. Location and size of subject area to b« inv«*tigalcd.

3. Type of geophy*lcaI lurvty or surveys,

4. Type,make,andmodelofgeo-physical initrument and i tn i i l iv i ty of instruments; limitalioni of inilru-rfi*nti or methods with respect (o iurvty,

5. Who did Ih* g«ophysical sur­vey and when survey was done,'

6. Reliability of data; "busts" in the dala; nature and lOurct i of %i-rors; extent of ambiguity in inlet-prttatioru.

7. Nature and source of availablt surface and subsurface stological, crMpnttrirtg, araVor geophysical in/or-malion published artd unpublished. Suitable explanation* theuld pro­vide any technical rtvjtwer with

mean* to assess ihe rehability ol the dala. (Subsurface interpretation of Ihe gtophysieal dala, by projection of geological or geophysical data from adjacent areas, and by use of bore-hoi* log*. It >* evident that dif­ferent tourct* of information can differ maritedly from one another in degr t i , detail and/or reliability ac­cording to the method used and accordirtg to Ih* source of inior­maiion baud on r i f i r t n c t to pub­lished or unpublished report!,)

8, Th* rtport ihould contain brief but complete d**chpiion* el al) nat­ural maitrials wiihin tht lub j tc l area (rocks, soil*, ele); if the geophysical report is lo bc indepindtnl of a 9«0' logic or engineering geologic report', adequate dtiicripliorts of geologic materials, structures, etc., should be included (see CDMG Note No, 44), Tht nature and source of such informalion should b« txplained. If the geophysical report i l part ot a geologic or engineering gtologic report, such descriptions need not be repeated in the lectlon pertaining to geopiiysici.

Sources thai may influence Ihe geophysical data within the subject area Or nearby (pipelinti, t i tclr ic lines, buildings, truck tra/fic, wind noise, t ic.) should b« specified. Where applicable, these influences should be shown on Iht map and/or described in the text.

Certain surveys must consider special conditions (e.g., magnetic storms for magnetic lurveyl). Thtst condiiioni should bt sptcitied and described in the text and Iht txteni of the influence on the dala should be described.

IV. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYING A, Tht investigation should includt

tht following:

1. Indtptndeni survey of Eubiect area al an appropriate scale and in sufficient detail 10 yield maximum return of pertinent data.

2. Survey may have to b t tx-tended into adjacent areas to obtain optimum data.

3. Survey* should b< shown on geologic and topographic base maps of suitable scale; nature and source of ba*t mapi should be clearly identified,

4. Survey lines and/or locations for rieording* should be clearly tdentified. Locations ihould bc iden­tified on the map of sampl** col­lected for laboratory tests or measurerrwnts.

».' />JI f>eiddata, reduction oTdata, and other calculation* should be included as an appendix. Reference to computer reduation of data and/ or modeling (Includ* name of pro-grsm If appticable and any modifies' lion lo i l ; type of computer) should

(Cl

AC

c

/ /