O&M Report Template for

Ground Water Remedies

(with Emphasis on Pump and Treat Systems) 

One of a Series on Optimization 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
Office of Solid Waste OSWER 9283.1-22FS 

and Emergency Response EPA 542-R-05-010 

(5102G) April 2005 

www.cluin.org 

www.epa.gov/superfund 

O&M Report Template for

Ground Water Remedies 

(With Emphasis on Pump and Treat Systems) 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
DISCLAIMER

This document provides references to models and processes in use by outside parties and other Federal Agencies. 

Mention of these models and processes does not imply endorsement for specific purposes. 

This fact sheet is not intended to be a detailed instruction manual. In addition, this fact sheet is not a regulation; 

therefore, it does not impose legally binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated community, and may 

not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. The document offers technical recommendations 

to EPA, States and others who manage or regulate long-term ground water remedies as part of the Superfund 

program or other cleanup programs. EPA and State personnel may use other approaches, activities and 

considerations, either on their own or at the suggestion of interested parties. Interested parties are free to raise 

questions and objections regarding this document and the appropriateness of using these recommendations in a 

particular situation, and EPA will consider whether or not the recommendations are appropriate in that situation. 

This fact sheet may be revised periodically without public notice. EPA welcomes public comments on this 

document at any time and will consider those comments in any future revision of this document. 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
PREFACE

This fact sheet provides a recommended report template that can be used to present information on the operations 

and maintenance (O&M) of a ground water remedy, particularly for those remedies including pump and treat 

(P&T). It is part of a series of fact sheets that the EPA Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology 

Innovation (OSRTI) is preparing as guidance to the ground water remediation community on effectively and 

efficiently designing and operating long-term ground water remedies. This series is available at 

www.cluin.org/optimization and consists of the following fact sheets, plus others that will be available in the 

future. 

• Elements for Effective Management of Operating Pump and Treat Systems 

OSWER 9355.4-27FS-A, EPA 542-R-02-009, December 2002 

• Cost-Effective Design of Pump and Treat Systems 

OSWER 9283.1-20FS, EPA 542-R-05-008, April 2005

• Effective Contracting Approaches for Operating Pump and Treat Systems

OSWER 9283.1-21FS, EPA 542-R-05-009, April 2005

• O&M Report Template for Ground Water Remedies (with Emphasis on Pump and Treat Systems) 

OSWER 9283.1-22FS, EPA 542-R-05-010, April 2005 

In addition, access to a wider range of EPA documents is available at www.cluin.org. 

The recommendations contained in this series of fact sheets are based on professional experience in designing and 

operating long-term ground water remedies and on lessons learned from conducting Remediation System 

Evaluations (RSEs) at Superfund-financed P&T systems. The results of the first 20 RSEs conducted at Superfundfinanced P&T systems are summarized in Pilot Project to Optimize Superfund-Financed Pump and Treat Systems: 

Summary Report and Lessons Learned (EPA 542-R-02-008a), and the site-specific recommendations from the 

evaluations are available in the individual RSE reports (EPA 542-R-02-008b through 542-R-02-008u). The 

content of these fact sheets is relevant to almost any P&T system. Therefore, these documents may serve as 

resources for managers, contractors, or regulators of any P&T system, regardless of the regulatory program. Most 

elements of this report template are also pertinent to other ground water remedies. 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
A. INTRODUCTION

.........

Operating ground water remedies such as pump and 

treat (P&T) systems generally require operation and 

maintenance (O&M) activities to occur over a long 

period of time, sometimes decades. Routine O&M 

reports accomplish the following: 

• present operational data associated with the 

treatment plant, and identify operational problems 

and/or system modifications associated with the 

treatment plant 

• summarize subsurface data that have been 

collected, and interpret progress towards shortterm and long-term remedy goals 

• suggest system modifications to improve 

performance, reduce costs, and/or increase 

likelihood of site closeout 

Contractors typically prepare these reports annually 

once the system is operating routinely, but in some 

cases, reports are prepared quarterly or semi-annually. 

Effective O&M reports are much more than a series of 

data tables and/or maps for the most recent reporting 

period. O&M reports should also include an 

interpretation of the data with respect to system 

performance (subsurface and above-ground) and 

historical trends. O&M reports should be prepared and 

submitted as soon after the end of the reporting period 

as is practicable, so that the data and associated 

interpretations can be used as a basis for system 

modifications in a timely manner. 

Interpreting data, preparing reports, and submitting data 

and/or reports can be facilitated by electronic data 

management. Spreadsheet, database, and/or geographic 

information system (GIS) software allows data to be 

stored, retrieved, interpreted, updated, and plotted in a 

timely and cost-effective manner. It also facilitates 

generating report tables and figures, and it significantly 

reduces the possibility of entry errors. Therefore, siterelated data (including ground water quality, water 

levels, and process monitoring results) should be 

managed electronically whenever possible. Data 

should also be submitted electronically whenever 

possible because it facilitates data management for all 

site stakeholders. This includes the exchange of data 

between laboratories, consultants, site representatives, 

and site regulators. In some cases, this may mean 

sharing or submitting spreadsheets, database files or 

even graphics or plotting files. Some regulatory 

1 

B. SUGGESTED STRUCTURE AND CONTENT 

............. 2 

............. 2 

................ 3 

Title Page ........................ 4 

................ 5 

.................. 7 

9 

23 

APPENDIX A: SAMPLE TABLES 

APPENDIX B: SAMPLE FIGURES 

Organization of this Document 

A. INTRODUCTION ...................... 

OF AN O&M REPORT 

C. O&M REPORT TEMPLATE 

Letter of Transmittal 

Executive Summary 

Table of Contents 

1.0 Introduction .................... 

2.0 Operations Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

3.0 Subsurface Performance Summary . 17 

4.0 Suggested System Modifications . . 

agencies have developed specific formats for 

electronic data deliverables. The use of commonlyused software or non-proprietary open data standards 

(e.g., XML) should help facilitate data retrieval, 

particularly after long-term storage. 

With regard to reports, it is often appropriate to submit 

an electronic (e.g., PDF) version of the O&M report in 

addition to or instead of a hard copy. The electronic 

version facilitates distributing the report to a wider 

audience, such as owners of adjacent impacted 

properties, the public, or remedy evaluation teams. 

The purpose of this document is to provide site 

managers, contractors, and regulators with a 

recommended report template for preparing effective 

O&M reports. Although this fact sheet provides 

important information to be included in an O&M 

report, it does not replace the need for active 

management and oversight to ensure a protective and 

cost-effective remedy that is optimized over time 

based on O&M data. In addition, even though 

preparing an O&M report involves interpreting data 

and documenting potential modifications to improve 

the system, it does not replace the value of performing 

independent optimization evaluations. Independent 

evaluations are designed to provide objective 

evaluation of the remedy and provide 

recommendations for potential improvements. For 

additional information on how O&M reports relate to 

overall management and optimization of a P&T 

1 
system, the reader is referred to Elements for Effective 

Management of Operating Pump and Treat Systems, 

December 2002 (EPA 542-R-02-009/OSWER 

9355.4-27FS-A). 

B. SUGGESTED STRUCTURE AND

CONTENT OF AN O&M REPORT 

......... 

Each site is unique, and it is not possible to provide a 

template for the content of an O&M report that is 

suitable for every site. However, this document does 

provide a suggested structure for an O&M report, and 

also provides suggested items that should typically be 

included in the content of an O&M report. Sample 

tables (Appendix A) and sample figures (Appendix B) 

are included to highlight items discussed within this 

document and to serve as a guide for format and/or 

content of such tables and figures in an O&M report. 

An O&M report generally contains the following 

sections: 

• letter of transmittal and title page 

• executive summary 

• table of contents 

• introduction 

• operations summary 

• subsurface performance summary 

• suggested system modifications 

• tables and figures 

Tables and figures are included to present data and 

support interpretations discussed in the text. The 

location of tables and figures within the O&M report is 

a stylistic preference. In most cases, the tables and 

figures are placed at the end of the document (prior to 

any appendices) or at the end of chapters where they are 

referenced. In other cases, tables and figures are placed 

immediately after they are referenced in the text, but 

this approach complicates formatting of the document. 

In some cases, the O&M report will also include 

appendices. The appendices might include raw data, 

copies of letters, copies of permits, chain of custody 

forms, or any other information that does not fit easily 

into the main body of the report. 

C. O&M REPORT TEMPLATE

......... 

The remainder of this document provides a 

recommended O&M report template, organized 

according to the typical sections of an O&M report 

listed earlier. The following conventions are utilized: 

• Plain text is used to list sections or subsections 

that should be included in the O&M report, and 

to list items that should generally appear in the 

specific section or subsection being discussed. 

• Text enclosed in brackets (“[ ]”) indicates that 

site-specific information should be added, as 

appropriate. 

• Plain text boxes (unshaded, outlined with plain 

lines) present samples of report content (such as a 

sample cover letter). 

• Text boxes with shadow-style outlines are used at 

the end of sections or subsections to list sample 

tables (in Appendix A) or sample figures (in 

Appendix B) that pertain to that specific section 

or subsection, and to highlight important aspects 

of those samples. 

It is not the intent of this document to provide a report 

template, or sample tables and figures, that can be 

directly applied for all sites. Some site-specific issues 

that might add additional complexity to an O&M 

report include the following: 

• multiple aquifers are impacted by contaminants 

• multiple contaminant types (e.g., metals, volatile 

organic compounds, pesticides, etc.) are present 

• multiple media are being sampled (e.g., ground 

water, surface water, sediments) 

For remedies other than P&T, there may be some 

sections in this report template that do not apply. For 

instance, a monitored natural attenuation (MNA) 

remedy may not have an “operations summary” 

section, since there is no active treatment system. In 

other cases, there may be multiple treatment systems, 

such as P&T coupled with soil vapor extraction (SVE) 

or free-product recovery in a source area. This may 

require additional sections of text, and/or additional 

tables and figures, compared to this report template. 

2 
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Sample Letter of Transmittal 

[Letter-Head of Organization Sending Report] 

[date report signed or sent] 

[name of person receiving report]

[address of person receiving the report, line 1]

[address of person receiving the report, line 2]

[address of person receiving the report, line 3]

Reference: [reference line 1] 

[reference line 2] 

Dear [fill in as appropriate]: 

[Organization sending report] is pleased to submit [number of copies] copies of the attached [annual, quarterly, 

etc.] O&M report for [site name and/or system name] located in [location]. This report summarizes O&M 

activities for the period [begin date] to [end date]. This report is submitted in accordance with [any regulatory 

stipulations]. The supporting data are being submitted electronically [describe format and method of 

submittal]. 

[Summary of any non-routine items that merit mention in the letter of transmittal]. 

If there are any questions regarding this report, please contact [name] at [phone number and/or email address]. 

Sincerely, 

[signature] 

[printed name of sender] 

[title] 

Enclosures: O&M report [indicate number of volumes if more than 1] 

[any other enclosures, such as electronic data] 

cc: [list name and organization of others receiving the report, indicate if “cover letter only”] 

The reference line(s) indicate the following: 

• the nature of the report contents (e.g., “O&M Progress Report”) 

• the frequency associated with this reporting (e.g., “annual”, “quarterly”, etc.) 

• the reporting period (e.g., “January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003") 

• the site name and location, and regulatory case number for the site (if applicable) 

Non-routine items of importance that merit inclusion in the letter include a discharge of effluent that exceeded 

permit limits, a major change to the system or system status, a change of contractor, a change in the individual or 

organization submitting the report, major community relations activity, or a major new finding in the subsurface. 

3 
TITLE PAGE

Sample Title Page 

[annual, quarterly, etc.] O&M Report

Reporting Period [begin date] to [end date]

[site name and/or system name]

[site location]

[regulatory identification number, if applicable]

Submitted To:

[name of person receiving report]

[address of person receiving the report, line 1]

[address of person receiving the report, line 2]

[address of person receiving the report, line 3]

Prepared By:

[name/organization sending report]

[address of sender, line 1]

[address of sender, line 2]

[phone number of sender]

[date report signed/prepared]

[signature lines, if appropriate]

4 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Purpose of Report 

Provide a brief (i.e., one paragraph) introduction that identifies the following: 

• type of remedy that the report covers (e.g., P&T or some other ground water remedy) 

• the site name and location 

• whether or not this report is associated with a specific reporting frequency (e.g., annual, quarterly) 

• the reporting period ( “begin date” to “end date” ) 

• any regulatory stipulation mandating the submission of this report and/or the contents of the report 

This section should generally be duplicated from Section 1.1 of the main report. 

Operations Summary 

Include the following: 

• a brief statement indicating the extent of system downtime (if any) during the reporting period, and 

whether or not any downtime was “non-routine” 

• a statement indicating whether or not process monitoring indicated any exceedances of treatment system 

discharge limits during the reporting period 

• a statement indicating whether or not there were any significant operational problems (sub-surface or 

above-ground) during the reporting period 

• a statement indicating whether or not noteworthy system modifications were made or other non-routine 

maintenance was conducted (sub-surface or above-ground) during the reporting period 

• for sites with significant public involvement, a statement indicating any contact with the public or public 

officials with respect to the remedy 

• if staffing changes were made, a statement to this effect with new names and contact information 

The purpose of including these statements in the executive summary is to clearly indicate to the reader whether or 

not non-routine items occurred during the reporting period, and if so, the general nature of those items. The details 

associated with these items should be provided in the body of the report. 

Interpretation of Progress with Respect to System Goals 

Include the following: 

• a brief statement of the goals of the P&T system (e.g., containment and/or restoration, and the relative 

priority if multiple goals are present) 

• a brief statement indicating if data collected during the reporting period (e.g., water levels, ground water 

concentrations, etc.) are consistent or inconsistent with expectations and/or previous data (if not, include 

5 
a brief description of the difference) 

• a statement indicating if short-term remedy goals are being met, based on an interpretation of data 

collected and implementation of institutional controls 

• a statement indicating if longer-term remedy goals are being met or when they will likely be met, based 

on an interpretation of data collected and implementation of institutional controls 

• a statement indicating whether or not new inconsistencies or gaps in the current “site conceptual model” 

have been identified based on an interpretation of O&M data and whether or not the site conceptual 

model has been updated accordingly 

Details regarding these interpretations should be provided in the body of the report. 

Suggested Modifications to Ground Water Remedy and/or Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) Program 

Include the following: 

• a statement indicating whether or not there are any recommendations in this report to modify or enhance 

the ground water remedy and/or LTM program 

• a brief description of any such recommendations 

The details of recommended modifications, the rationale behind those recommendations, and estimated costs 

and/or savings associated with the recommendations will generally be provided in the body of the report. 

6 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sample Table of Contents 

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [page] 

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [page] 

1.0 Introduction ...................................................................... [page] 

2.0 Operations Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [page] 

3.0 Subsurface Performance Summary .................................................... [page] 

4.0 Suggested System Modifications ..................................................... [page] 

List of Tables 

[table number and title for each table] 

List of Figures 

[figure number and title for each figure] 

List of Appendices 

[appendix letter and title for each Appendix] 

For longer O&M reports, it is appropriate to also include subsections in the Table of Contents. If tables and 

figures appear at the end of the report or the end of each section (the most common approaches), there is no need to 

provide page numbers for each table and figure. 

7 
This page is intentionally left blank. 

8
1.1 

1.2 

1.0 INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 

Provide a brief (i.e., one paragraph) introduction that identifies the following: 

• type of remedy that the report covers (e.g., P&T or some other ground water remedy) 

• the site name and location (generally references a site location figure) 

• whether or not this report is associated with a specific reporting frequency (e.g., annual, quarterly) 

• the reporting period this report pertains to 

• any regulatory stipulation mandating the submission of this report and/or the contents of the report 

This section should be duplicated in the first section of the Executive Summary. 

Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 1.1 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Site Vicinity and Well Locations (Sample Figure 1) 

Figures illustrating map features should include a north arrow, a graphic scale, and a legend. Ideally enough 

key features are included to provide adequate orientation to the reader, but not so much detail that the reader 

is distracted from the most important site features. 

BRIEF SUMMARY OF SITE CONCEPTUAL MODEL 

Identify the following in this section to briefly describe the site conceptual model: 

• historic and continuing sources of ground water contamination, including soil contamination and nonaqueous phase liquid (NAPL) 

• site hydrogeology, including depth to ground water, ground water flow direction (horizontal and 

vertical), approximate ground water flow magnitude, interaction of ground water with surface water 

• potential human and ecological receptors 

• historic and current extent of contaminant plume with respect to sources, potential receptors, and other 

landmarks such as property boundaries 

• brief description of historic site remedies, such as source removal or control activities, that impact the 

site conceptual model 

9 
1.3 STATEMENT OF REMEDY GOALS AND CONDITIONS FOR TERMINATING 

THE GROUND WATER REMEDY 

Identify the following in this section: 

• brief description of the current ground water remedy (including extension of water lines, institutional 

controls, etc.) as outlined in a decision document, order, or permit 

• the short-term and long-term remedy goals (cleanup, containment, or both) 

• if both cleanup and containment are goals, the relative priority of each remedy goal as stated in decision 

documents or agreed upon by the site stakeholders 

• the items to be measured to evaluate whether or not the goals are attained and if progress is being made 

with respect to those goals 

• conditions that must be met to terminate all (or some) components of the ground water remedy as stated 

in decision documents or agreed upon by the site stakeholders 

Also indicate if there is an impending change in responsibility for operation of the remedy, such as a Superfund 

“Fund-lead” site about to be turned over to a state, and the reason for the change. 

1.4 REMEDY DESCRIPTION 

1.4.1 Pump and Treat System Description 

Provide a brief description of the extraction and treatment systems, including the following: 

• the number of extraction wells and the approximate total flow rate 

• a map indicating the locations of the extraction wells, the treatment plant, and discharge point 

• the treatment components and general design parameters of each component 

• where treated water is discharged 

For other long-term ground water remediation technologies, such as in-situ bioremediation, the items described in 

this section could be replaced or augmented by other pertinent items, such as injection wells, injection volumes, 

etc. 

1.4.2 Other Remedy Components 

In this section, also identify other long-term ground water remedy components, such as institutional controls, that 

augment the P&T system. For institutional controls, include the following: 

• what the institutional control is intended to accomplish 

• who it is designed to inform and what area it applies to 

• how the institutional control is implemented and maintained (e.g., zoning ordinance, deed restriction, 

recurring notices to property owners, etc.) 

10 
1.5 

• when the institutional control was implemented or will be implemented 

• the party that is responsible for compliance 

INTERACTION WITH PUBLIC AND/OR AGENCIES 

Indicate if there has been any significant interaction with the public or with regulators during the current reporting 

period, or if such interaction is planned for the next reporting period. This might include items such as visits to the 

site by concerned private citizens or community groups, or a site visit by regulatory agencies as part of a five-year 

review. 

11 
This page is intentionally left blank. 

12
2.0 OPERATIONS SUMMARY

2.1 SYSTEM DOWNTIME 

2.1.1 Routine 

Include the following in this section: 

• if system does not run continuously by design, briefly explain why (this could alternatively be explained 

in a general system description presented in the introduction of the report) 

• dates system was down for routine reasons, and briefly indicate the purpose for each downtime event 

2.1.2 Non-Routine 

Include the following in this section: 

• dates system was down for non-routine reasons - indicate the cause, and indicate what actions were taken 

to resolve the situation 

• actions that have been taken (or are expected to be taken) to avoid the same situation from occurring in 

the future or to otherwise minimize downtime in the future 

Some evaluation should be made as whether or not such downtime may have resulted in unacceptable migration of 

contaminants, or if any investigation is merited to reach such a conclusion. 

2.2 OPERATIONAL DATA AND PROCESS MONITORING DATA 

2.2.1 Plant Influent and Effluent, and Efficiency of Above-Ground Treatment Components 

Include the following in this section: 

• treatment plant process monitoring schedule that clearly indicates the sampling locations within the 

treatment plant, and the frequency for monitoring different parameters 

• flow rates and total volume treated (compare to historic values and design values) 

• influent concentrations (compare to historic values and design values, and also compare to treatment 

plant discharge criteria to determine if treatment is actually required) 

• any new or unexpected constituents detected in the influent 

• effluent concentrations (compare to discharge criteria and historic values); any values that exceed 

discharge criteria should be highlighted and an explanation should be included 

• compare plant influent concentrations to plant effluent concentrations to determine treatment efficiency 

of the entire treatment system (compare to design treatment efficiency) 

• if there is process monitoring between treatment components, present and discuss the treatment 

efficiency of individual treatment components 

• other data or information regarding efficiency, such as pressure differentials for filters, air-to-water ratios 

for air strippers, etc. 

13 
If actual values for flow rate, influent concentrations, or mass loading are very different from design values, an 

evaluation of alternative treatment technologies may be merited to determine if there is a more cost-effective 

option. Also, any additional sources of flow and/or mass loading to the system (e.g., purge water from well 

sampling, filter backwash, water from other operations at the site, etc.) should be indicated. 

Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 2.2.1 

Tables (see Appendix A) 

- Treatment Plant Process Monitoring Schedule (Sample Table 1) 

- Treatment Plant Flow Rate, VOC Influent Concentration, and VOC Mass Loading (Sample Table 2) 

- Treatment Plant Influent/Effluent Concentrations and Air Stripper Efficiency (Sample Table 3) 

Parameter-specific discharge criteria should be included on tables that summarize effluent concentrations, and 

effluent values that exceed discharge limits should be highlighted using bolding and/or shading such that the 

reader can easily identify them. Explanations for exceedances should be included as a footnote to the table 

whenever possible and/or included in the text of the report. Also note that concentration values that are "not 

detected" should always be presented in a manner that clearly identifies the detection limit. If calculations 

are made that are based on non-detect values (such as the "air stripper efficiency" or an average 

concentration) a footnote should be used to indicate how non-detects were represented in the calculations. 

Often, one-half of the detection limit is used for such calculations. 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Plant Influent Flow Rate over Time, Compared with Design Flow Rate (Sample Figure 2)

 - Plant Influent VOC Concentration over Time, Compared with Design Concentration (Sample Figure 3)

 - Plant Monthly Mass Loading and Cumulative Mass Loading (Sample Figure 4) 

These figures illustrate historical data in addition to data from the current reporting period. The sample 

figures clearly indicate the current reporting period, allowing the reader to compare recent data to historical 

data. Design values are also included on the sample figures so the reader can easily discern if actual data are 

consistent with design values. Axes for graphs should be clearly identified. Units used (such as "ug/l" for 

concentrations) should be clearly identified in axis labels, titles, or legends. Annotations should be added to 

figures when feasible to explain data that deviate from typical or expected values. 

Note: Use footnotes on tables/figures to provide equations for calculations that are not obvious. 

2.2.2 Extraction Well Data 

Include the following in this section: 

• flow rates at extraction wells (compare to design values and to the maximum, minimum, and average of 

the historic values); any significant changes should be highlighted, and an explanation should be 

included 

• concentrations at extraction wells (compare to historic values) 

• specific capacities at extraction wells (compare to design estimates and historic values) 

Specific capacity is the pumping rate divided by the in-well drawdown relative to non-pumping (i.e., “static”) 

conditions. Decreases in specific capacity indicate the potential for well fouling, and measuring specific capacity 

may be important if there is a record of well fouling at the site. It is not always easy to compute specific capacity 

because the static water level is often not determined on a regular basis, and generally cannot be determined 

without shutting down pumping wells on a temporary basis. At many sites, it is not appropriate to shut down wells 

even temporarily, and such shutdowns should be justified by an evaluation that unacceptable migration of 

14 
contaminants will not occur. If static water level cannot be determined by intentionally shutting down pumping 

wells until they recover (or by another means), it may be necessary to estimate the static water level for calculating 

specific drawdown based on prior values (such as those determined during unintentional system shutdowns) or 

based on extrapolation of water levels measured outside the zone of influence. 

Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 2.2.2 

Tables (see Appendix A)

 - Extraction Wells: Pumping Rates and VOC Concentrations (Sample Table 4)

 - Specific Capacity at Extraction Wells (Sample Table 5) 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Average Flow Rates (Monthly) for Extraction Wells (Sample Figure 5) 

Declining extraction rates and/or declining specific capacities are indicative of potential fouling of the 

extraction well, and suggest the potential need for well rehabilitation. At some sites individual extraction 

wells may be pumping water that is below all pertinent ground water criteria, and discontinuing the pumping 

at those wells may be appropriate if that pumping is not required for plume capture. 

2.3 UTILITIES, CONSUMABLES, AND WASTE HANDLING/DISPOSAL 

2.3.1 Utilities Used 

Include the following in this section: 

• electricity and gas usage, and a list of components which use the majority of those resources 

• water usage (indicate what it is used for) 

• sewer usage (indicate discharge fee if one applies) for either a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) 

where treated or untreated ground water is discharged or for a sanitary sewer if those costs are significant 

• phone/fax/internet costs (if they are significant) 

2.3.2 Consumables Used 

Identify the purpose of each item, quantities used, and replacement frequency (e.g., liquid GAC, vapor GAC, 

chemical additions, ion exchange resin, etc.). 

2.3.3 Waste Handling/Disposal 

Include the following in this section: 

• types and quantities of waste generated (such as metals sludge, spent cartridge filters, etc.) 

• where waste is disposed of (including manifest tracking number) 

• any required waste sampling, and results of such sampling 

If waste manifests are included as an appendix to the report, provide a reference to that appendix in this section. 

15 
2.4 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED WITH P&T COMPONENT OPERATION 

2.4.1 Subsurface 

Indicate problems identified (e.g., pump failures, well fouling, piping leaks, flooded vaults, etc.), and explain how 

the problems have been (or will be) addressed. 

2.4.2 Above-Ground Treatment System 

Indicate problems identified (e.g., equipment failures, safety problems, etc.), and explain how the problems have 

been (or will be) addressed. 

2.5 SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS AND MAINTENANCE 

2.5.1 Routine Maintenance 

Summarize the routine maintenance activities performed during the reporting period, and identify planned routine 

maintenance for the next reporting period. 

2.5.2 System Modifications and Non-Routine Maintenance 

Summarize any system modifications or non-routine maintenance performed during the reporting period, including 

the reason the activity was performed and the results of the actions that were taken. If the remedy was modified, 

identify how the effectiveness of that modification may be tracked over time. Identify non-routine maintenance 

planned for the next reporting period (e.g., pump replacement, well rehabilitation, etc.). Identify schedule for 

major equipment replacement or reconstruction. 

2.6 OTHER OPERATIONS INFORMATION 

There may be important operations information that is not covered in the above sections. This section could be 

used to provide information such as the following: 

• effectiveness of any institutional controls in accomplishing its intended goal, including the information 

collected and reviewed to evaluate this effectiveness 

• any changes in contact information or the project team, including office-based contacts or treatment 

plant operators 

16 
3.1 

3.0 SUBSURFACE PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

SAMPLING EVENTS PERFORMED DURING THIS REPORTING PERIOD 

Include the following in this section: 

• a site location map indicating sampling locations 

• a list or table of sampling dates and sampling locations for water level measurements and water quality 

data (indicate which constituents were analyzed), and similar information for any other media sampled 

such as sediment, surface water, or air 

• an indication of how the sampling in the current reporting period relates to an overall sampling schedule 

(e.g., “as per the O&M plan, sampling in this quarter was only performed at eight wells, while sampling 

next quarter will be performed at all 15 site wells”) 

• sampling and analysis methods 

• for ground water wells, a “well construction” table that provides the following: 

< well name 

< date drilled 

< x-y coordinates (in a coordinate system that is identified) 

< ground surface elevation 

< measuring point, and how it is identified (such as “top of casing”) 

< total depth 

< aquifer screened 

< screen interval (top/bottom screen in ft MSL and/or depth from ground surface) 

Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 3.1 

Tables (see Appendix A)

 - Well Construction Information (Sample Table 6) 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Site Vicinity and Well Locations (Sample Figure 1) 

Wells screening different hydrogeologic units should be clearly differentiated on figures. 

3.2 SAMPLING RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION 

3.2.1 Water Levels 

Include the following in this section: 

• a table of water level measurements from the current reporting period that includes the following: 

< well name

< aquifer or unit monitored

< measuring point elevation

< date

17 
< depth to water 

< water level elevation

• if appropriate, historical water level measurements (either in same table, a separate table, or an appendix) 

• potentiometric surface contour maps (one map for each hydrostratigraphic unit of concern), for one or 

more dates during the reporting period 

< measured values should be indicated

< target capture zone and interpreted capture zone should be indicated whenever possible

< indicate if contouring was done by hand or with software

< if software is used for the contouring, indicate the software used, the options selected for

interpolating the data, and if any “pseudo data points” were added 

• for sites where vertical flow is important, patterns of vertical flow evaluated in text, tables, and figures 

(The end result should be an understanding of flow in three dimensions. Such evaluation can include 

water levels at clustered locations with wells that screen in different aquifers or horizons and interpreted 

maps illustrating locations of upward and downward flow. The upward and downward flow could be 

indicated at cluster locations or can be based on contoured water levels in different aquifers or horizons.) 

• if appropriate, hydrographs of individual wells to illustrate changes in water level versus time, and/or 

hydrographs for well pairs to illustrate head differences between the two locations over time (i.e., to 

establish upward or downward flow, inward flow across a boundary, etc.) 

Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 3.2.1 

Tables (see Appendix A)

 - Water Level Measurements, October 2002 (Sample Table 7)

 - Historical Water Level Elevations, ft MSL (Sample Table 8) 

Water level depths and elevations are generally reported to two decimal places. It is very important to clearly 

indicate whether specific data pertain to a “depth” or an “elevation”. If data pertain to a depth, the measuring 

point should also be indicated so elevations can be established. For tables that span multiple pages, it is 

suggested that page numbers include the total number of pages in the table, so the reader can determine if 

pages are missing. 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Shallow Water Levels, October 2002 (Sample Figure 6)

 - Water Levels at PZ-2 versus Extraction Rate of EW-2 (Sample Figure 7)

 - Hydrograph for MW-14 and MW-14D Well Cluster (Sample Figure 8) 

Note on the potentiometric surface map for shallow water levels that the actual measured values are indicated 

in addition to the contours, and that the contouring method is indicated. Also note that the target capture 

zone and interpreted capture zone are included on the figure. Potentiometric surface maps should include a 

north arrow, graphic scale, legend, and enough basemap features to adequately orient the reader. On 

hydrographs that illustrate water level versus time, axes should be clearly labeled. Note that one of these 

figures uses two different y-axes (water levels and pumping rates), with each axis clearly labeled including 

units of measurement. The scale of the y-axis should be selected so that variations in graphed values that are 

important can in fact be discerned by the reader. Sample Figure 8 illustrates a hydrograph used to interpret 

vertical flow potential (upward versus downward) at a specific location. Maps can also be used for such 

interpretations over space for a specific point in time. 

18 
3.2.2 Ground Water Concentrations 

Include the following in this section: 

• a table that provides the following data: 

< well name 

< aquifer or unit monitored 

< constituent and regulatory criteria for the constituent 

< date sampled 

< concentration (highlight values that exceed regulatory criteria) 

< units of measurement 

< any laboratory flags (e.g., “D”, “J”, etc.) 

< sampling method (if the sampling method has changed or multiple methods are used at the site) 

• non-detect values reported in a manner that indicates the constituent was not detected above a specific 

value, such as “ND(10)” or “<10" (Non-detect values should not simply be reported as ND) 

• if appropriate, historical concentration measurements (either in the same table, a separate table, or an 

appendix) 

• maps indicating the extent of contamination (“Bubble maps”, where the size of the bubble increases or 

color changes as concentration increases, may be effective for illustrating concentrations, either alone, or 

in conjunction with a contour map. Bubble sizes or colors should be explained in a legend and 

consideration should be given to choosing colors so that bubbles can be easily distinguished if the figure 

is printed in black and white. The concentration ranges that correspond to the various bubbles should be 

tied to meaningful values, such as the cleanup level or various orders of magnitude above the cleanup 

level.) 

• the following information if concentration contours are generated: 

< measured values 

< method of contouring (e.g., by hand or with software) 

< if software is used for the contouring, the name of the software, the options selected for 

interpolating the data, and if any “pseudo data points” were added (The reader should be able to 

produce a similar plot based on the information provided.) 

< any changes in contour methods or the number of data points if contour methods or the number of 

data points have changed since previous reports 

• if appropriate, plots of concentration versus time at individual wells or groups of wells to illustrate trends 

3.2.3 Other Monitoring Results 

O&M monitoring may also be performed for the following other media: 

• surface water 

• sediment 

• air 

Include tables, figures, and/or appendices to present current and historical sampling results for these media as 

appropriate. 

19 
Sample Tables or Figures Relevant to Section 3.2.2 

Tables (see Appendix A)

 - Historical Concentration Data at Monitoring Wells (Sample Table 9) 

This is one of many formats that can be used. The format selected depends on the number of constituents, the 

number of wells, and the number of sampling events. For tables that span multiple pages (often the case), it is 

suggested that page numbers include the total number of pages in the table, so the reader can determine if 

pages are missing. Ground water criteria should be indicated on the table, and values that exceed the criteria 

should be highlighted using bolding and/or shading so they are easily identified. Values that are "not 

detected" should always be presented in a manner that clearly identifies the detection limit. 

Figures (see Appendix B)

 - Shallow Benzene Concentrations, October 2002 (Sample Figure 9)

 - Benzene Concentration versus Time at MW-8, MW-8D, and MW-9 (Sample Figure 10) 

The sample map for shallow benzene concentrations is a "bubble map", where the size of the bubble increases 

as concentrations increase. The legend is essential for such figures. It is recommended that bubble sizes 

allow concentrations below pertinent criteria to be easily identified. "Non-detect" values should be indicated 

with a unique symbol so they can be easily identified. Measured values should be displayed whenever 

possible. Concentration maps should include a north arrow, graphic scale, legend, and enough basemap 

features to adequately orient the reader. On the graphs of concentration versus time, axes should be clearly 

labeled. A logarithmic scale is often used for the y-axis because concentration ranges are so large. When 

using a logarithmic scale a value of "0" is not permitted, so values that are "not detected" should be plotted at 

one-half the detection limit, the detection limit, or an assigned value such as "0.1". The approach used for 

plotting "non-detects" should be indicated on the figure. Ground water criteria can also be indicated on the 

figure for clarity. 

3.3 INTERPRETATION OF PROGRESS TOWARD SYSTEM GOALS 

3.3.1 Progress with Respect to Short-Term Goals 

Discuss if short-term goals (see Section 1.2) are being met, based on an interpretation of O&M data. Explain how 

the data support the conclusion. Statistical analysis of the data may be helpful in identifying/evaluating trends or 

comparing concentrations to baseline or cleanup levels because it helps eliminate bias during data interpretation. 

3.3.2 Progress with Respect to Long-Term Goals 

Discuss if long-term goals are being met (see Section 1.2) based on an interpretation of O&M data. Explain how 

the newly collected data and data trends support that conclusion. Compare the data to preset milestones, provide 

an estimate as to when long-term goals are expected to be achieved, and explain the basis for that estimate. 

Indicate if consideration of modified remedial strategy (more aggressive or less aggressive) and/or consideration of 

Technical Impracticability is appropriate. Statistical analysis of the data may be helpful in identifying/evaluating 

trends or comparing concentrations to baseline or cleanup levels because it helps eliminate bias during data 

interpretation. For additional information on statistical tools, the reader is referred to the following documents: 

Gibbons, R. and D. Coleman, Statistical Methods for Detection and Quantification of Environmental 

Contamination, John Wiley & Sons, 2001 

Methods for Evaluating the Attainment of Cleanup Standards, Volume 2: Ground Water, U.S. EPA, 

1992 (EPA 230-R-92-014) 

20 
3.3.3 Gaps or Inconsistencies in Site Conceptual Model 

Indicate whether or not there are gaps in the conceptual understanding of contaminant sources and/or contaminant 

transport at the site that prevent an adequate assessment of system effectiveness and progress towards remedy 

goals. If such gaps in the site conceptual model exist, suggest data collection activities that would mitigate the 

gaps, including a cost-benefit assessment as to whether or not such data collection should be pursued. When 

appropriate, provide a time table for when those suggested activities could be implemented. If new data have been 

collected that alters the site conceptual model, discuss how the site conceptual model has been modified. 

21 
This page is intentionally left blank. 

22
4.1 

4.0 SUGGESTED SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS 

SUGGESTIONS FOR SYSTEM MODIFICATION 

Include suggestions for system modifications to improve performance, reduce costs, and/or increase likelihood of 

achieving cleanup goals. Components of O&M to be considered for modifications include the following: 

• ground water extraction 

• above-ground treatment 

• disposal of treated water 

• long-term monitoring program 

Evaluate potential modifications based on system inefficiencies, technological developments, modified regulations, 

and recent revisions to the site conceptual model. Include an estimate of costs to implement the recommendations, 

and estimate the increase or decrease in annual costs likely to result from the recommendation. Summarize the 

findings and recommendations from recent evaluations and the progress toward implementing those 

recommendations. 

23 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
APPENDIX A: 

SAMPLE TABLES 

The sample tables presented herein are intended to highlight items discussed within this document and to serve as a 

guide for format and/or content of such tables in an O&M report. Obviously, it is not possible to provide sample 

tables that directly apply to all sites. Some site-specific issues that might add additional complexity include the 

following: 

• multiple aquifers impacted by contaminants 

• multiple contaminant types (e.g., metals, VOCs, pesticides, etc.) 

• multiple remedies (e.g., P&T coupled with soil vapor extraction (SVE) or free product recovery) 

• multiple media where sampling is performed (e.g., ground water, surface water, sediments) 

There may also be site-specific requirements that mandate different formats and/or additional content to be 

displayed in tables. 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
Sample Table 1. Treatment Plant Process Monitoring Schedule 

A 

(EQ tank eff) 

B 

(filter eff) 

C 

(air stripper eff) 

D 

(GAC-1 eff) 

E 

(GAC-2 eff) 

metals quarterly quarterly monthly 

VOC's quarterly quarterly quarterly monthly 

Sampling Points 

A: Effluent from equalization tank (blended influent to treatment plant, prior to filters) 

B: Effluent from filters (prior to air stripper) 

C: Effluent from air stripper 

D: After first of two GAC vessels operated in series 

E: After second of two GAC vessels operated in series (plant effluent) 
Sample Table 2. Treatment Plant Flow Rate, VOC Influent Concentration, and VOC Mass Loading 

Month Flow Rate 

(gpm) 

Design 

Flow Rate 

(gpm) 

Influent 

VOC Conc. 

(ug/L) 

Design Influent 

VOC Conc. 

(ug/L) 

Mass Loading 

This Month 

(lbs) 

Design Mass Loading 

Per Month 

(lbs) 

Cumulative 

Mass Loading 

(lbs) 

Jan-99 62.2 100 1194.4 2000 26.7 71.9 26.7 

Feb-99 65.1 100 843.7 2000 19.8 71.9 46.5 

Mar-99 64.2 100 870.5 2000 20.1 71.9 66.6 

Apr-99 65.3 100 806.4 2000 18.9 71.9 85.5 

May-99 64.0 100 1008.4 2000 23.2 71.9 108.7 

Jun-99 64.3 100 666.8 2000 15.4 71.9 124.2 

Jul-99 63.3 100 623.2 2000 14.2 71.9 138.4 

Aug-99 67.6 100 561.8 2000 13.7 71.9 152.0 

Sep-99 62.9 100 686.5 2000 15.5 71.9 167.6 

Oct-99 48.6 100 692.2 2000 12.1 71.9 179.7 

Nov-99 62.6 100 629.1 2000 14.2 71.9 193.8 

Dec-99 64.7 100 622.8 2000 14.5 71.9 208.3 

Jan-00 65.7 100 2000 14.5 71.9 222.8 

Feb-00 63.3 100 2000 14.5 71.9 237.3 

Mar-00 65.0 100 400.3 2000 9.4 71.9 246.7 

Apr-00 63.5 100 2000 9.4 71.9 256.0 

May-00 65.3 100 2000 9.4 71.9 265.4 

Jun-00 58.2 100 517.0 2000 10.8 71.9 276.2 

Jul-00 57.4 100 2000 10.8 71.9 287.0 

Aug-00 58.1 100 2000 10.8 71.9 297.9 

Sep-00 54.9 100 563.8 2000 11.1 71.9 309.0 

Oct-00 54.9 100 2000 11.1 71.9 320.1 

Nov-00 55.0 100 2000 11.1 71.9 331.3 

Dec-00 68.4 100 484.7 2000 11.9 71.9 343.2 

Jan-01 66.0 100 2000 11.9 71.9 355.1 

Feb-01 67.2 100 2000 11.9 71.9 367.0 

Mar-01 62.5 100 571.5 2000 12.8 71.9 379.9 

Apr-01 68.0 100 2000 12.8 71.9 392.7 

May-01 63.2 100 2000 12.8 71.9 405.6 

Jun-01 64.5 100 557.2 2000 12.9 71.9 418.5 

Jul-01 62.1 100 2000 12.9 71.9 431.4 

Aug-01 64.5 100 2000 12.9 71.9 444.4 

Sep-01 59.9 100 582.7 2000 12.6 71.9 456.9 

Oct-01 55.2 100 2000 12.6 71.9 469.5 

Nov-01 54.2 100 2000 12.6 71.9 482.0 

Dec-01 51.8 100 548.2 2000 10.2 71.9 492.3 

Jan-02 50.8 100 2000 10.2 71.9 502.5 

Feb-02 48.4 100 2000 10.2 71.9 512.7 

Mar-02 65.9 100 397.8 2000 9.4 71.9 522.1 

Apr-02 62.9 100 2000 9.4 71.9 531.5 

May-02 66.2 100 2000 9.4 71.9 541.0 

Jun-02 62.1 100 444.4 2000 9.9 71.9 550.9 

Jul-02 63.8 100 2000 9.9 71.9 560.8 

Aug-02 68.3 100 2000 9.9 71.9 570.8 

Sep-02 67.5 100 364.4 2000 8.8 71.9 579.6 

Oct-02 63.3 100 2000 8.8 71.9 588.5 

Nov-02 65.6 100 2000 8.8 71.9 597.3 

Dec-02 59.6 100 373.7 2000 8.0 71.9 605.3 

Jan-03 68.1 100 2000 8.0 71.9 613.3 

Feb-03 61.7 100 2000 8.0 71.9 621.3 

Mar-03 64.7 100 337.2 2000 7.8 71.9 629.2 

Apr-03 63.9 100 2000 7.8 71.9 637.0 

May-03 62.5 100 2000 7.8 71.9 644.9 

Jun-03 61.9 100 358.8 2000 8.0 71.9 652.9 

Jul-03 62.1 100 2000 8.0 71.9 660.9 

Aug-03 64.2 100 2000 8.0 71.9 668.9 

Sep-03 64.3 100 349.4 2000 8.1 71.9 676.9 

Oct-03 66.2 100 2000 8.1 71.9 685.0 

Nov-03 67.0 100 2000 8.1 71.9 693.1 

Dec-03 65.0 100 326.3 2000 7.6 71.9 700.7 

Notes: Mass per Month (lbs) = Q (gpm) * C (ug/L) * 3.785L/gallon * 1440min/day * 2.2lbs/1E9ug * 30day/month 
Sample Table 3. Treatment Plant Influent/Effluent Concentrations and Air Stripper Efficiency 

Month 

Discharge Limit 

Influent 

Benzene 

(ug/L) 

5 

Influent 

Nickel 

(ug/L) 

200 

Influent 

Lead 

(ug/L) 

50 

Effluent 

Benzene* 

(ug/L) 

5 

Effluent 

Nickel 

(ug/L) 

200 

Effluent 

Lead 

(ug/L) 

50 

Benzene Between 

Air Stripper and GAC 

(ug/L) 

Air Sripper 

Efficiency*** 

(%) 

Jan-99 1194.4 29.6 25.2 ND(1) 20.8 13.1 19.2 98.39% 

Feb-99 843.7 16.8 23.8 ND(1) 15.6 9.2 7.1 99.16% 

Mar-99 870.5 41.4 28.7 ND(1) 25.0 16.2 13.9 98.40% 

Apr-99 806.4 42.0 27.3 ND(1) 27.3 18.0 11.1 98.62% 

May-99 1008.4 41.9 25.2 9.4** 29.2 19.4 15.4 98.47% 

Jun-99 666.8 29.1 11.3 ND(1) 14.0 8.0 10.3 98.46% 

Jul-99 623.2 21.7 18.8 ND(1) 18.5 11.4 9.1 98.54% 

Aug-99 561.8 34.2 21.2 ND(1) 16.4 9.8 5.6 99.00% 

Sep-99 686.5 38.4 32.2 ND(1) 26.8 17.6 11.8 98.28% 

Oct-99 692.2 10.8 10.9 ND(1) 10.3 5.2 5.7 99.18% 

Nov-99 629.1 29.1 28.4 ND(1) 16.1 9.6 10.7 98.30% 

Dec-99 622.8 16.7 19.9 ND(1) 14.6 8.4 3.7 99.41% 

Jan-00 ND(1) 20.7 13.0 

Feb-00 ND(1) 11.2 5.9 

Mar-00 400.3 32.5 23.5 ND(1) 22.8 14.6 4 99.00% 

Apr-00 ND(1) 20.5 12.9 

May-00 ND(1) 13.5 7.6 

Jun-00 517.0 12.8 7.6 ND(1) 10.2 5.2 3.9 99.25% 

Jul-00 ND(1) 18.7 11.5 

Aug-00 ND(1) 12.0 6.5 

Sep-00 563.8 38.5 30.1 ND(1) 19.3 12.0 2.9 99.49% 

Oct-00 ND(1) 26.7 17.5 

Nov-00 ND(1) 16.7 10.0 

Dec-00 484.7 29.8 14.7 ND(1) 22.3 14.2 1.1 99.77% 

Jan-01 ND(1) 17.8 10.8 

Feb-01 ND(1) 21.3 13.5 

Mar-01 571.5 29.1 20.8 ND(1) 26.9 17.7 5.2 99.09% 

Apr-01 ND(1) 17.8 10.9 

May-01 ND(1) 17.1 10.4 

Jun-01 557.2 34.3 22.8 ND(1) 17.1 10.3 5.1 99.08% 

Jul-01 ND(1) 29.1 19.3 

Aug-01 ND(1) 15.5 9.1 

Sep-01 582.7 30.6 23.2 ND(1) 22.4 14.3 5 99.14% 

Oct-01 ND(1) 11.0 5.7 

Nov-01 ND(1) 15.2 8.9 

Dec-01 548.2 26.0 32.9 ND(1) 24.8 16.1 4.9 99.11% 

Jan-02 ND(1) 12.5 15.8 

Feb-02 ND(1) 20.2 13.0 

Mar-02 397.8 21.7 11.5 ND(1) 11.5 7.1 5.5 98.62% 

Apr-02 ND(1) 25.6 15.2 

May-02 ND(1) 24.4 8.9 

Jun-02 444.4 28.5 12.2 ND(1) 12.9 7.5 ND(1) 99.89% 

Jul-02 ND(1) 20.3 9.0 

Aug-02 ND(1) 15.6 12.7 

Sep-02 364.4 30.6 27.8 ND(1) 13.2 13.9 4.3 98.82% 

Oct-02 ND(1) 15.8 20.0 

Nov-02 ND(1) 26.7 18.6 

Dec-02 373.7 14.4 35.8 ND(1) 10.5 16.4 3.9 98.96% 

Jan-03 ND(1) 12.6 9.4 

Feb-03 ND(1) 18.9 8.1 

Mar-03 337.2 15.8 33 ND(1) 14.8 16.2 2.3 99.32% 

Apr-03 ND(1) 26.2 17.1 

May-03 ND(1) 14.2 18.7 

Jun-03 358.8 35.2 26.5 ND(1) 20.3 8.6 1.8 99.50% 

Jul-03 ND(1) 25.1 19.0 

Aug-03 ND(1) 24.9 11.6 

Sep-03 349.4 19.7 20.1 ND(1) 13.5 18.2 ND(1) 99.86% 

Oct-03 ND(1) 27.6 6.9 

Nov-03 ND(1) 22.6 14.5 

Dec-03 326.3 37.7 23.4 ND(1) 29.1 17.6 ND(1) 99.85% 

* ND(1) indicates sample was "not detected" above a detection limit of 1.0 ug/l 

** Exceedance of discharge criteria due to fouled carbon, more frequent carbon changeouts instituted thereafter

*** If sample between stripper and GAC was "not detect", the air stripper efficiency is calculated using half the detection limit
Sample Table 4. Extraction Wells: Pumping Rates and VOC Concentrations 

Pumping Rate (gpm) VOC Concentration (ug/l) 

Month EW-1 EW-2 EW-3 Total EW-1 EW-2 EW-3 

Jan-99 3.4 16.4 42.4 62.2 3983.2 2836.8 335.5 

Feb-99 5.0 19.6 40.5 65.1 

Mar-99 3.8 19.3 41.1 64.2 

Apr-99 3.8 18.1 43.4 65.3 3613.2 1625.9 218.9 

May-99 4.6 19.0 40.4 64.0 

Jun-99 3.7 17.4 43.2 64.3 

Jul-99 3.8 18.6 40.9 63.3 2067.8 1234.6 210.9 

Aug-99 5.0 19.3 43.3 67.6 

Sep-99 3.3 15.4 44.2 62.9 

Oct-99 4.0 19.8 24.8 48.6 2959.1 907.6 154.5 

Nov-99 3.3 17.0 42.3 62.6 

Dec-99 4.6 18.7 41.4 64.7 

Jan-00 4.9 16.7 44.1 65.7 

Feb-00 3.2 17.3 42.8 63.3 

Mar-00 3.1 19.3 42.6 65.0 

Apr-00 4.2 19.0 40.3 63.5 2544.2 584.0 243.3 

May-00 3.9 16.5 44.9 65.3 

Jun-00 3.8 14.0 40.4 58.2 

Jul-00 3.7 11.0 42.7 57.4 

Aug-00 3.8 10.2 44.1 58.1 

Sep-00 4.5 9.6 40.8 54.9 

Oct-00 3.7 9.8 41.4 54.9 2989.7 696.7 142.9 

Nov-00 3.9 8.4 42.7 55.0 

Dec-00 4.9 18.8 44.7 68.4 

Jan-01 3.7 19.2 43.1 66.0 

Feb-01 3.3 19.4 44.5 67.2 

Mar-01 4.6 16.0 41.9 62.5 

Apr-01 3.5 19.9 44.6 68.0 3086.9 751.3 116.4 

May-01 4.9 15.6 42.7 63.2 

Jun-01 3.7 18.7 42.1 64.5 

Jul-01 3.0 18.2 40.9 62.1 

Aug-01 3.0 19.7 41.8 64.5 

Sep-01 4.7 18.2 37.0 59.9 

Oct-01 3.2 16.5 35.5 55.2 2720.8 874.2 64.5 

Nov-01 3.5 18.6 32.1 54.2 

Dec-01 3.1 19.0 29.7 51.8 

Jan-02 3.8 16.7 30.3 50.8 

Feb-02 3.1 19.0 26.3 48.4 

Mar-02 4.7 17.9 43.3 65.9 

Apr-02 4.3 17.8 40.8 62.9 

May-02 4.7 18.6 42.9 66.2 

Jun-02 4.7 16.0 41.4 62.1 

Jul-02 4.1 18.7 41.0 63.8 

Aug-02 3.5 20.0 44.8 68.3 

Sep-02 4.2 18.5 44.8 67.5 

Oct-02 3.6 15.3 44.4 63.3 2665.7 471.0 121.4 

Nov-02 3.7 19.6 42.3 65.6 

Dec-02 3.6 15.3 40.7 59.6 

Jan-03 4.1 19.2 44.8 68.1 

Feb-03 4.3 16.3 41.1 61.7 

Mar-03 3.8 18.1 42.8 64.7 

Apr-03 3.5 18.0 42.4 63.9 

May-03 3.4 15.4 43.7 62.5 

Jun-03 3.1 16.0 42.8 61.9 

Jul-03 3.6 16.9 41.6 62.1 

Aug-03 3.2 16.1 44.9 64.2 

Sep-03 3.4 18.8 42.1 64.3 

Oct-03 4.0 17.8 44.4 66.2 3487.5 179.2 124.3 

Nov-03 4.1 18.2 44.7 67.0 

Dec-03 3.3 16.8 44.9 65.0 
Sample Table 5. Specific Capacity at Extraction Wells 

Pumping Rate (gpm) In-Well Drawdown (ft) Specific Capacity (gpm/ft) 

Sample Date EW-1 EW-2 EW-3 EW-1 EW-2 EW-3 EW-1 EW-2 EW-3 

1/13/1999 3.6 17.0 44.4 12.54 25.32 24.22 0.29 0.67 1.83 

4/6/1999 3.8 18.2 41.0 13.11 26.29 23.95 0.29 0.69 1.71 

7/15/1999 3.7 18.6 40.3 13.44 25.77 24.33 0.28 0.72 1.66 

10/5/1999 4.2 19.4 40.4 12.93 26.78 24.00 0.32 0.72 1.68 

4/7/2000 4.1 19.4 40.8 13.22 37.44 25.00 0.31 0.52 1.63 

10/1/2000 3.9 7.6 42.2 12.24 45.33 27.34 0.32 0.17 1.54 

4/12/2001 3.5 19.9 43.0 11.43 25.00 35.33 0.31 0.80 1.22 

10/14/2001 3.3 17.5 32.5 11.88 22.32 40.98 0.28 0.78 0.79 

4/9/2002 4.1 17.0 40.8 13.32 20.87 24.04 0.31 0.81 1.70 

10/3/2002 3.8 16.3 44.4 13.01 18.33 25.22 0.29 0.89 1.76 

4/14/2003 3.7 18.0 45.0 12.34 21.10 25.39 0.30 0.85 1.77 

10/16/2003 4.2 18.8 43.9 14.11 20.88 24.87 0.30 0.90 1.77 

Notes: (1) specific capacity is pumping rate divided by in-well drawdown, shaded values indicate significant decreases in specific capacity that suggest well fouling

 (2) well EW-2 rehabilitated November 2000, well EW-3 rehabilitated January 2002
Sample Table 6. Well Construction Information 

Well_ID 

Date 

Completed X_Coord 

(ft) 

Y_Coord 

(ft) 

Ground Surface 

Elevation 

(ft MSL) 

Measuring Point 

TOC* Elevation 

(ft MSL) 

Total Depth 

(ft) 

Aquifer 

Screened ** 

Depth To 

Top Screen 

(ft) 

Depth To 

Bottom Screen 

(ft) 

Elevation 

Top Screen 

(ft MSL) 

Elevation 

Bottom Screen 

(ft MSL) 

MW-1 Apr-95 2197.08 1992.72 653.97 655.47 62.77 S 50.00 60.00 603.97 593.97 

MW-2 Apr-95 1777.64 2020.44 651.49 652.99 71.37 S 55.00 65.00 596.49 586.49 

MW-3 Apr-95 1907.00 1978.72 656.06 657.56 62.17 S 50.00 60.00 606.06 596.06 

MW-4 Nov-95 1966.36 1929.72 645.74 647.24 53.65 S 38.00 48.00 607.74 597.74 

MW-5 Nov-95 1816.00 1901.72 647.98 649.48 47.42 S 35.00 45.00 612.98 602.98 

MW-6 Nov-95 1616.64 1793.36 646.77 648.27 52.31 S 40.00 50.00 606.77 596.77 

MW-7 Nov-95 2225.08 1796.72 655.58 657.08 50.64 S 37.00 47.00 618.58 608.58 

MW-8 Nov-95 1942.00 1730.36 647.07 648.57 63.45 S 35.00 45.00 612.07 602.07 

MW-9 Nov-95 1760.00 1601.00 656.89 658.39 50.58 S 40.00 50.00 616.89 606.89 

MW-10 May-96 2050.36 1594.00 657.02 658.52 46.87 S 35.00 45.00 622.02 612.02 

MW-11 May-96 1802.00 1464.64 656.70 658.20 57.33 S 38.00 48.00 618.70 608.70 

MW-12 May-96 1924.36 1307.28 652.99 654.49 54.70 S 37.00 47.00 615.99 605.99 

MW-13 May-96 1844.00 1205.92 658.51 660.01 57.66 S 38.00 48.00 620.51 610.51 

MW-14 May-96 1936.17 1244.00 653.47 654.97 55.91 S 40.00 50.00 613.47 603.47 

MW-15 May-96 1952.36 814.20 682.11 683.61 50.33 S 34.00 44.00 648.11 638.11 

MW-16 May-96 2106.08 835.20 681.12 682.62 55.00 S 37.00 47.00 644.12 634.12 

MW-17 May-96 1987.36 964.56 684.22 685.72 41.72 S 31.00 41.00 653.22 643.22 

PZ-1 Nov-97 1959.36 1174.28 665.07 666.57 44.22 S 25.00 35.00 640.07 630.07 

PZ-2 Nov-97 1817.87 1763.40 659.14 660.64 59.44 S 55.00 65.00 604.14 594.14 

PZ-3 Nov-97 1982.37 1761.77 642.92 644.42 39.46 S 39.00 49.00 603.92 593.92 

MW-8D Nov-95 1945.00 1734.36 646.95 648.45 80.66 D 108.00 118.00 538.95 528.95 

MW-11D May-96 1805.00 1468.64 658.35 659.85 93.43 D 118.00 128.00 540.35 530.35 

MW-14D May-96 1940.17 1247.00 655.18 656.68 89.96 D 113.00 123.00 542.18 532.18

 EW-1 Nov-97 1938.64 1167.56 666.00 60.00 S 25.00 55.00 641.00 611.00

 EW-2 Nov-97 1805.64 1786.08 661.12 105.00 S 60.00 100.00 601.12 561.12

 EW-3 Nov-97 1993.8 1786.08 642.99 85.00 S 40.00 80.00 602.99 562.99 

* TOC indicates "Top of Casing"

** S indicates the shallow aquifer, and D indicates the deep aquifer
Sample Table 7. Water Level Measurements, October 2003 

Well ID 

Aquifer 

Screened * 

TOC 

Elevation 

(ft MSL) 

Depth to 

Water 

(ft) 

Water Level 

Elevation 

(ft MSL) 

MW-1 S 655.47 49.73 605.74 

MW-2 S 652.99 47.64 605.35 

MW-3 S 657.56 51.74 605.82 

MW-4 S 647.24 37.79 609.45 

MW-5 S 649.48 38.97 610.51 

MW-6 S 648.27 28.53 619.74 

MW-7 S 657.08 36.84 620.24 

MW-8 S 648.57 36.91 611.66 

MW-9 S 658.39 30.52 627.87 

MW-10 S 658.52 31.26 627.26 

MW-11 S 658.20 21.75 636.45 

MW-12 S 654.49 11.93 642.56 

MW-13 S 660.01 15.36 644.65 

MW-14 S 654.97 12.33 642.64 

MW-15 S 683.61 9.47 674.14 

MW-16 S 682.62 8.29 674.33 

MW-17 S 685.72 18.49 667.23 

PZ-1 S 666.57 21.72 644.85 

PZ-2 S 660.64 34.28 626.36 

PZ-3 S 644.42 19.12 625.30 

MW-8D D 648.45 7.45 641.00 

MW-11D D 659.85 35.61 624.24 

MW-14D D 656.68 9.82 646.86 

* S indicates the shallow aquifer, and D indicates the deep aquifer
Sample Table 8. Historical Water Level Elevations (ft MSL) Page 1 of 2 

Well_ID MW-1 MW-2 MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-7 MW-8 MW-9 MW-10 MW-11 

Aquifer 

Monitored Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow 

01/01/99 606.11 605.12 606.11 609.09 610.08 619.26 620.20 611.57 627.94 627.44 636.37 

04/01/99 604.73 605.56 606.47 609.38 610.05 619.59 620.24 611.88 628.20 627.04 636.84 

07/01/99 603.44 602.16 602.85 605.90 606.48 615.72 616.96 608.32 625.27 624.24 633.04 

10/01/99 603.92 604.70 606.61 609.24 610.48 619.34 620.22 611.40 628.28 627.47 635.98 

01/01/00 606.88 604.96 606.52 609.46 610.08 619.06 620.11 611.44 628.14 627.49 636.05 

04/01/00 604.32 604.90 606.44 609.75 609.65 619.49 619.85 611.41 627.99 627.76 635.58 

07/01/00 602.05 600.71 601.64 604.95 605.20 614.34 616.02 607.47 623.02 622.69 632.40 

10/01/00 602.46 605.77 606.05 608.77 610.36 619.65 620.05 611.52 628.35 627.09 635.82 

01/01/01 605.86 605.45 605.65 609.21 609.90 619.32 620.46 611.79 627.94 627.51 636.15 

04/01/01 605.37 605.27 605.72 608.74 609.54 619.21 620.84 611.62 627.63 627.95 635.92 

07/01/01 603.98 604.73 606.40 609.09 610.03 619.59 619.92 611.78 627.88 627.63 636.10 

10/01/01 605.06 605.54 606.78 608.53 609.86 620.02 620.85 611.86 627.92 627.35 636.80 

01/01/02 606.71 605.07 606.48 608.81 609.76 619.71 620.58 612.31 627.92 627.17 636.59 

04/01/02 602.86 604.74 606.28 608.82 609.66 619.82 620.74 610.95 628.26 627.32 637.05 

07/01/02 601.88 605.56 606.26 609.37 609.87 618.96 620.01 611.87 627.59 627.65 635.92 

10/01/02 602.37 605.74 605.33 609.80 610.80 619.69 620.13 612.13 628.11 627.60 636.18 

01/01/03 605.69 605.42 605.82 609.32 610.39 619.54 620.28 611.67 627.68 627.12 636.64 

04/01/03 604.96 605.35 605.34 609.10 610.27 620.02 620.40 612.10 627.78 627.07 636.86 

07/01/03 604.29 605.44 606.27 609.07 609.59 618.77 620.39 611.66 628.36 627.49 636.40 

10/01/03 605.74 605.35 605.82 609.45 610.51 619.74 620.24 611.66 627.87 627.26 636.45 
Sample Table 8. Historical Water Level Elevations (ft MSL) Page 2 of 2 

Well_ID MW-12 MW-13 MW-14 MW-15 MW-16 MW-17 PZ-1 PZ-2 PZ-3 MW-8D MW-11D MW-14D 

Aquifer 

Monitored Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Shallow Deep Deep Deep 

01/01/99 642.32 644.80 642.82 674.66 674.56 667.62 644.80 606.61 605.12 641.51 623.86 646.34 

04/01/99 642.44 644.66 642.83 674.82 674.86 667.14 645.24 607.01 605.45 641.41 623.44 646.73 

07/01/99 638.72 641.26 639.22 671.09 671.62 664.50 641.84 603.51 601.73 638.19 620.98 643.04 

10/01/99 642.32 644.81 642.15 674.77 674.85 667.45 644.59 606.95 605.50 641.99 623.52 645.99 

01/01/00 641.91 645.26 642.53 674.55 674.68 667.27 644.49 606.79 605.12 641.82 623.87 646.32 

04/01/00 641.83 644.84 642.28 674.81 674.47 667.41 644.63 607.24 605.16 642.29 624.08 646.69 

07/01/00 638.34 640.38 638.74 669.95 670.52 662.95 640.11 607.25 600.40 637.24 619.18 641.53 

10/01/00 642.32 645.56 642.71 674.40 674.57 667.69 644.82 611.07 605.61 642.36 624.63 646.30 

01/01/01 641.97 645.17 642.38 674.86 674.13 667.43 644.59 606.49 605.39 641.87 624.27 646.06 

04/01/01 642.23 645.52 642.17 674.52 673.70 667.24 644.85 606.50 605.75 642.35 623.81 646.43 

07/01/01 642.54 644.57 643.22 675.10 674.60 667.60 644.33 606.53 605.11 641.43 623.46 645.96 

10/01/01 641.92 644.65 643.12 674.34 674.62 667.63 644.57 607.19 610.58 641.28 624.23 646.22 

01/01/02 642.05 644.45 642.79 674.29 674.19 667.23 644.39 607.00 610.20 641.42 623.90 646.62 

04/01/02 641.98 644.07 643.14 674.73 674.64 667.21 644.00 607.19 604.90 641.53 623.64 646.26 

07/01/02 642.75 644.60 643.19 674.87 674.67 667.21 644.54 606.58 605.30 641.58 624.24 646.12 

10/01/02 642.84 645.16 642.29 674.41 674.29 667.33 645.43 606.20 605.51 640.69 623.70 646.59 

01/01/03 642.49 644.85 642.66 674.28 674.50 667.30 645.07 606.47 605.42 641.09 624.11 646.74 

04/01/03 642.65 645.19 642.43 674.60 674.93 667.76 645.53 606.30 604.96 641.32 624.15 646.64 

07/01/03 642.73 644.47 642.53 674.22 674.07 667.61 644.37 606.53 604.95 641.69 624.14 646.35 

10/01/03 642.56 644.65 642.64 674.14 674.33 667.23 644.85 606.36 605.30 641.00 624.24 646.86 
---

Sample Table 9. Historical Concentration Data at Monitoring Wells 

Monitoring 

Well Date Benzene (μg/L) 

Toluene 

(μg/L) 

Ethyl 

Benzene 

(μg/L) 

Total 

Xylenes 

(μg/L) 

Total Nickel 

(μg/L) 

Total 

Lead 

(μg/L) 

MCL 5 1000 700 10000 15 

MW-1 

(shallow) 

Jan-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 9.7 5.4 

Apr-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 5.6 5.0 

Jul-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 8.3 8.4 

Oct-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 7.2 9.5 

Oct-99 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 5.5 5.5 

Oct-00 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 5.0 7.6 

Oct-01 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 10.6 9.2 

Oct-02 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 5.6 6.1 

MW-2 

(shallow) 

Jan-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 5.6 6.2 

Apr-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 11.6 6.0 

Jul-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 14.9 5.7 

Oct-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 8.0 5.9 

Oct-99 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 11.8 6.2 

Oct-00 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 10.4 6.1 

Oct-01 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 8.0 5.3 

Oct-02 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 13.5 5.3 

{data omitted for many wells for this example} 

MW-8 

(shallow) 

Jan-98 3153.5 91.5 ND(1) ND(1) 5.2 26.5 

Apr-98 3684.2 121.6 ND(1) ND(1) 9.0 12.8 

Jul-98 2209.1 103.1 ND(1) ND(1) 13.4 20.7 

Oct-98 2324.8 108.2 ND(1) ND(1) 14.2 14.3 

Oct-99 3191.7 131.3 ND(1) ND(1) 14.6 29.7 

Oct-00 4197.4 75.6 ND(1) ND(1) 14.9 18.3 

Oct-01 1614.8 144.5 ND(1) ND(1) 6.0 23.1 

Oct-02 2728.8 141.9 ND(1) ND(1) 13.3 11.4 

MW-8D 

(deep) 

Jan-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 2.6 22.3 

Apr-98 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(2) 21.0 

Jul-98 0.7J ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(2) 17.1 

Oct-98 1.3 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 4.5 22.7 

Oct-99 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 3.0 24.5 

Oct-00 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(2) 12.8 

Oct-01 1.1 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 3.9 13.2 

Oct-02 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 4.4 28.8 

MW-9 

(shallow) 

Jan-98 120.0 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 30.5 16.3 

Apr-98 53.0 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 27.3 17.2 

Jul-98 18.2 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 30.7 7.8 

Oct-98 2.4 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 31.4 13.8 

Oct-99 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 20.2 6.6 

Oct-00 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 33.2 11.5 

Oct-01 1.3 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 37.8 10.4 

Oct-02 ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) ND(1) 25.8 12.1 

{data omitted for remaining wells for this example} 

Notes:

 ND(1) indicates sample was "not detected" above a detection limit of 1.0 ug/l

 J indicates "estimated value"

 Values above the MCL are shaded and bolded 
APPENDIX B: 

SAMPLE FIGURES 

The sample figures presented herein are intended to highlight items discussed within this document and to serve as 

a guide for format and/or content of such figures in an O&M report. Obviously, it is not possible to provide 

sample figures that directly apply to all sites. Some site-specific issues that might add additional complexity 

include the following: 

• multiple aquifers impacted by contaminants 

• multiple contaminant types (e.g., metals, VOCs, pesticides, etc.) 

• multiple remedies (e.g., P&T coupled with soil vapor extraction (SVE) or free product recovery) 

• multiple media where sampling is performed (e.g., ground water, surface water, sediments) 

There may also be site-specific requirements that mandate different formats and/or additional content to be 

displayed on figures. 
This page is intentionally left blank. 
Sample Figure 1. Site Vicinity and Well Locations 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð ð 

ð 

ð ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

ð 

% 

% % 

$ 

$ 

$ 

Ú 

Ú Ú 

i ial 

Agricultural

Area 

i l l 

ial 

ð ð 

MW-1 

MW-2 

MW-3 

MW-4 

MW-5 

MW-6 MW-7 

MW-8 

MW-9 

PZ-1 

PZ-2 PZ-3 

MW-10 

MW-11 

MW-12 

MW-13 

MW-14 

MW-15 

MW-16 

MW-17 

MW-8D 

EW-1 

EW-2 EW-3 

MW-11D 

MW-14D 

Res dent Area 

Agr cu tura Area 

Industr Area 

MW MW-19 -18 

% 

Ú 

ð 

$ 

100

N

W E 

S 

LEGEND 

Shallow Piezometer 

Shallow Extraction Well 

Shallow Monitoring Well 

Deep Monitoring Well 

Buildings 

Facility Boundary 

Former Lagoon 

0 100 200 Feet 
Sample Figure 2. Plant Influent Flow Rate Over Time, Compared With Design Flow Rate 

0.0 

20.0 

40.0 

60.0 

80.0 

100.0 

120.0 

Flow Rate (gpm) 

Historic System Flow Rate 

Design Flow Rate 

Current Reporting Period 

EW-3 Pump Down 10 Days 

EW-3 Rehabilitated 

EW-2 Rehabilitated 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Dec-00 Jul-01 Dec-01 Jul-02 Dec-02 Jul-03 Dec-03 

Month 

Note: Although flow rate is less than design flow rate, capture appears sufficient based on water level map interpretations 
Sample Figure 3. Plant Influent VOC Concentration Over Time, Compared With Design Concentration 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1000 

1200 

1400 

1600 

1800 

2000 

2200 

2400 

VOC Concentration (ug/L) 

Historic Influent Concentration 

Design Influent Concentration 

Current Reporting Period 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Dec-00 Jul-01 Dec-01 Jul-02 Dec-02 Jul-03 Dec-03 

Month 

Note: Actual influent VOC's are far less than design values, cost-benefit analysis regarding alternative treatment technologies should be performed 
Sample Figure 4. Plant Monthly Mass Loading and Cumulative Mass Loading 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

Mass Loading (lbs) 

0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

700 

800 

Cumulative Mass Loading (lbs) 

Mass Loading (lbs) 

Design Mass Loading per Month 

Cumulative Mass Loading (lbs) Current Reporting Period 

Mass per Month (lbs) = Q (gpm) * C (ug/L) * 3.785L/gallon * 1440min/day * 2.2lbs/1E9ug * 30day/month 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Dec-00 Jul-01 Dec-01 Jul-02 Dec-02 Jul-03 Dec-03 

Month 

Note: Actual mass loading is far less than design values, cost-benefit analysis regarding alternative treatment technologies should be performed 
Sample Figure 5. Average Flow Rates (Monthly) for Extraction Wells 

0 

10 

20 

30 

40 

50 

60 

70 

80 

Flow Rate (gpm) 

EW-1 (Design Flow Rate: 10 gpm) 

EW-2 (Design Flow Rate: 40 gpm) 

EW-3 (Design Flow Rate: 50 gpm) Current Reporting Period 

EW-3 Pump Down 10 Days 

EW-3 Rehabilitated 

EW-2 Rehabilitated 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Jan-00 Jul-00 Dec-00 Jul-01 Dec-01 Jul-02 Dec-02 Jul-03 Dec-03 

Month 
100 0 100 200 Feet

LEGEND

Buildings

Facility Boundary

Former Lagoon

% Shallow Piezometer

Ú Shallow Extraction Well

ð Shallow Monitoring Well

$ Deep Monitoring Well

Water Level Contour 640

Interpreted Capture Zone

Target Capture Zone

ð

ð

ð

ð

ð

ð ð

ð

ð ð

ð

ð

ð

ð

ð

ð

ð

%

% %

Ú

Ú Ú

MW-2

MW-4 MW-5

MW-6 MW-7

MW-8

MW-9

PZ-1

PZ-2 PZ-3

MW-10

MW-11

MW-12

MW-13

MW-14

MW-15

MW-16

MW-17

EW-1

EW-2 EW-3

MW-3 MW-1

605.74

605.35

605.82

609.45

610.51

619.74 620.24

611.66

627.87 627.26

636.45

642.56

644.65

642.64

674.14

674.33

667.23

644.85

626.36 625.30

ð ð

MW-18 MW-19

637.02 636.35

Sample Figure 6. Shallow Water Levels (October 2002)

Water level data contoured using

SURFER kriging (default options)

100 0 100 200 Feet

LEGEND

N

W E

S
Sample Figure 7. Water Levels at PZ-2 versus Extraction Rate of EW-2

600 

602 

604 

606 

608 

610 

612 

Water Level (ft) 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

Pumping Rate (gpm) 

PZ-2 EW-2 

EW-2 Rehabilitated 

Current Reporting Period 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Mar-01 Sep-01 Apr-02 Nov-02 May-03 Dec-03 

Time 
Sample Figure 8. Hydrograph for MW-14 and MW-14D Well Cluster 

638 

640 

642 

644 

646 

648 

650 

Water Level (ft) 

MW-14 MW-14D 

* Seasonal water supply pumping from nearby wells 

(discontinued after Summer 2000) 

Current Reporting Period 

* 

* 

* 

* 

Jan-99 Jul-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Mar-01 Sep-01 Apr-02 Nov-02 May-03 Dec-03 

Time 
Sample Figure 9. Shallow Benzene Concentrations (October 2002) 

N 

N 

N 

N 

N 

N N 

# 

N # 

# 

# 

# # 

$ 

$ 

N 

# 

# # 

# 

# # 

MW-1 

MW-2 

MW-3 

MW-4 

MW-5 

MW-6 MW-7 

MW-8 

MW-9 MW-10 

MW-11 

MW-12 

MW-13 MW-14 

MW-15 

MW-16 

MW-17 

PZ-1 

PZ-2 PZ-3 

EW-1 

EW-2 EW-3 

ND(1) 

ND(1) 

ND(1) 

ND(1) ND(1) 

ND(1) ND(1) 

2729 

ND(1) 20 

351 

1218 

2005 

4526 

NA 

NA 

ND(1) 

5001 

400 960 

3488 

179 124 

N MW-18 

ND(1) ND(1) 

MW-19 N 

N W S

LEGEND 

Benzene Concentration 

(MCL = 5 ug/L) 

N ND (Non Detect) 

# <= 5 ug/L 

# 5 - 50 ug/L 

# 50 - 500 ug/L 

# > 500 ug/L

$ NA (Not Analyzed) 

Target Capture Zone 

Buildings 

Facility Boundary 

Former Lagoon 

100 0 100 200 Feet 100 0 100 200 Feet

E
Sample Figure 10. Benzene Concentration versus Time at MW-8, MW-8D, and MW-9 

0.1 

1.0 

10.0 

100.0 

1000.0 

10000.0 

Concentration (ug/L) 

MW-8 MW-8D MW-9 

Dec-97 Jul-98 Feb-99 Aug-99 Mar-00 Sep-00 Apr-01 Oct-01 May-02 Dec-02 

Date 

Note: For samples that are "not detected", the value plotted is half the detection limit 
NOTICE: 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency funded the preparation of this document by GeoTrans, Inc. under General Service 

Administration Contract GS06T02BND0723 to S&K Technologies, Inc., Bremerton, Washington; EPA Contract No. 68-C-02-

092 to Dynamac Corporation, Ada, Oklahoma; and EPA Contract No. 68-W90-0065 to ICF Consulting, Inc., Fairfax, Virginia. 

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 

This document may be downloaded from EPA’s Clean Up Information (CLUIN) System at http://www.cluin.org. Hard copy 

versions are available free of charge from the National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP) at the 

following address: 

U.S. EPA NSCEP

P.O. Box 42419

Cincinnati, OH 45242-2419 

Phone: (800) 490-9198 or (513) 489-8190 

Fax: (513) 489-8695