Monitoring, pilot testing

Piiot Testing. Pilot testing of each PSM system will be performed at two locations to be selected by the project team. The test period will be two months. During the test period, the project team will monitor the PSM system to assure that procedures are clear and do not conflict with other procedures. 

The next step for this effort is to put our ideas to work. We have decided that the best way to do this is through pilot testing of the new PSM system. This will allow us to closely monitor the system itself and make any adjustments needed it will also provide a wealth of information we can use as we install the system throughout all division facilities. 

The PSM Task Force will oversee the pilot throughout its duration, monitor its progress, and develop recommendations for improvement. Individual task force members will actively participate in the pilot test, to support Ray s managerial responsibilities and to provide specific input as needed. The Task Force reports to the division s Vice President—Environmental, Health, and Safety. 

Company X s Corporate Safety Director, who has acted as a consultant to the Task Force, will continue as an advisor during the pilot test. As the company s PSM champion, he will be actively involved in the monitoring, reviewing, and recommendations phases. The Safety Director reports to Company X s General Manager—Environmental, Health, and Safety. 

It s reasonable to expect that you will need to generate interim reports on the pilot test. Such reports would logically include discussion of progress to date, organized to include the key indicators you have been monitoring. In addition, you may wish to include other topics, such as ... 

With each use of (necessarily) conservative assumed data, the precision of the estimate is diminished. Field pilot testing is an effective way to generate valid data for input into the models. When natural attenuation is selected as the best option, continued monitoring for 3 to 10 years should be expected. 

In late April 1994, one additional monitor well (MW-9) was installed in an attempt to define the southern boundary of the contaminant plume. The consultant also conducted a pilot test to determine the design parameters for an SVE system (INTERA/BAI 1994b). The pilot test was done using 50 inches water column (we) vacuum, resulting in a well flow rate of 3 cubic feet per minute (cfm) and extracted vapor concentrations of less than 1,000 parts per million volume (ppmv). The radius of influence (ROI) suggested by the test results ranged from about 6.8 to 8.6 feet, which would result in an extraction well spacing of 10 to 15 feet. 

The June mini-pilot tests showed that the flow from individual wells varied from less than 1 to 16 cfm at a vacuum of approximately 70 inches of water. The hydrocarbon vapor concentrations ranged from 188 to 4,630 ppmv (Table 2). Based on the June vapor flows and hydrocarbon concentrations, 13 wells were selected for continued SVE operation to maintain hydraulic control. These included wells 1-2, 1-5, and 1-7 from circuit 1, wells 2-1 and 2-6 from circuit 2, all wells except well 3-3 in circuit 3, and combination monitor/SVE well MW-9 (Fig. 6). 

Quarter of Remedial System Operations Mini- Pilot Test Number Date of Test Maximum PSH Thickness in Monitor Wells (ft) Concentration Range Hydro- C02 02 carbons (%) (%) (ppmv) ... 

Mixed results, as indicated by the decreasing gasoline-equivalent hydrocarbon burn rate and increasing natural gas consumption, were observed after these adjustments to the system. The gasoline-equivalent hydrocarbon burn rate decreased from between 0.55 and 0.60 gal/hr to between 0.25 and 0.30 gal/hr. However, by the next set of mini-pilot tests, completed on November 19, 1996, the bubblers were successful in removing not only the PSH in these two wells, but also a significant portion of the PSH present in monitor wells in the vicinity. 

The extension of SVE techniques to low-permeability soils was based on monitoring the vapor recovery rate and using the results of mini-pilot tests to adjust SVE system operation. The periodic mini-pilot tests provided information from individual SVE wells, including air flow, well vacuum, and hydrocarbon concentration in the extracted vapors, that was used to balance the flows. Wells with low hydrocarbon concentrations were shut off to focus remedial efforts on the most contaminated locations, and during some periods, wells with high flows were shut off to allow a more balanced flow from low flow wells or to provide hydraulic control along the periphery of the perched groundwater contaminant plume. 

Ultraviolet spectrophotometry (DuPont 400 SO2 analyzer) was used to monitor the gas phase SO2 concentrations and SO2 removal efficiencies. The pH of scrubbing liquor in each reactor was measured hourly during pilot testing. Solid dewatering properties were characterized by hold tank slurry settling rate and filter cake insoluble solids concentration. Detailed descriptions of the test facilities and analytical procedures were reported earlier(S). 

Unlike the above two tests, the pilot test can provide more-detailed information. The test has a test machine in the process (similar to that in the applications test), which is operated for a longer period (normally a minimum of 30 d). It provides long-term membrane operation data such as fouling and chemical stability data. However, it can be expensive to perform, in terms of cost of equipment, and daily monitoring. 

TABLE 2L1. Concentration Variations of Major Contaminants Detected in the Monitoring Well in an In Situ Pilot Test Using EK-Fenton-Catalytic Iron Wall Technology... 

Until recently, one of the main tests was the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) smoke chamber (ASTM E662) [13]. In this test, a vertical sample is decomposed under radiant heat in a sealed cabinet and the build up of optical density is monitored. The test can be run under both smouldering and flaming conditions, depending on whether a pilot ignition flame is present. 

Regarding testing of compostability, DIN EN 13432, DIN EN 14995, and AS 4736 specify that the tests have to be performed in a monitored pilot plant (equivalent to a real composting plant). However, similar to ASTM D6400 and ISO 17088, they do not provide requirements for specific procedures. The DIN EN standards set the maximum test duration for aerobic composting at 12 weeks. ASTM D6400 (with a reference to ASTM D6002) specifies 45 days or five weeks with the option for an extension up to six months. 

This section presents the way forward road maps for the subsurface surveillance and monitoring activities of the pilot test stage 1. The maps are based upon the SSMP used by Staatsolie and incorporate the recormnendations made in the previous sections of this paper. The objectives include providing the schematic of the processes, activities, and tasks to be accomphshed, and decisions to be made while conducting the pilot test, as well as easing the review of the contingency program. 

Measure and monitor. Installation at the test sites will be closely monitored against an established timetable, as well as in terms of our established PSM criteria and goals. Throughout this process, we will solicit feedback and other commentary from the pilot sites for incorporation into ongoing process improvement. 

---