Kansas Bureau of Waste Management 2006 ... - Waterra-In-Situ

HydraSleeve® SAMPLING STUDY
AT
KANSAS SMAL ARID LANDFILLS (SALs)
by
Stephanie J. Schauer, ESII
Hydrogeologic Unit
Kansas Department of Health and Environment
Bureau of Waste Management
Solid Waste Permits Section
1000 SW Jackson, Suite 320
Topeka, Kansas 66612-1367
October 2006
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENT ◊ Bureau of Waste Management
CURTIS STATE OFFICE BUILDING, 1000 SW JACKSON ST., STE. 320, TOPEKA, KS 66612-1367
Voice 785-296-1600 Fax 785-296-1592 http://www.kdheks.gov/waste

HydraSleeve® Sampling Study
at
Kansas Small Arid Landfills (SALs)
1.0 Objective: The objective of this study was to test an alternative sampling technique, the
HydraSleeve® Sampler, at select Small Arid Landfills (SALs) in order to support general
approval for use during regular ground water monitoring events. This new method of sampling
has been shown to be a more cost effective method of sampling especially in areas where there is
limited water available for sampling, as is the case at many of the SALs. Though much data is
available though several other studies conducted by the EPA, ITRC, and the Army Corps of
Engineers, KDHE-BWM proposed to conduct a limited test study at current facilities prior to
making the alternative sampling method available to any of the 33 SALs as an optional sampling
method for ongoing site monitoring.
2.0 Study Procedure: Split sampling using the HydraSleeve® was conducted at three
facilities. The original proposal included sampling at four facilities. The fourth facility,
Sheridan County, was eliminated from the study due to scheduling and time constraints.
Samples were collected from Thomas County SAL on April 26, 2006, Pratt County SAL on May
2, 2006, and Rooks County SAL on May 3, 2006. Sampling was scheduled to coincide with
regularly scheduled ground water monitoring events. All wells were inspected and static and
total depth measurements were taken using an electric water level tape indicator prior to
sampling. Samples collected using the HydraSleeve® were collected first. Immediately
following collection of the HydraSleeve® sample, the wells were purged and sampled in
accordance with current Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAPs) for respective facilities. Common
purging and sampling procedure is to purge the well of a minimum of three borehole volumes
using either a bailer or peristaltic pump. The samples are then collected using disposable or
dedicated bailers.
HydraSleeve® samples were collected in accordance with the standard operating procedures
outlined in the “HydraSleeve Field Manual”. Appropriate sampling protective equipment was
used at all times. Sampling gloves were changed between collection of each sample. Used
HydraSleeves®, gloves, and sampling twine were disposed of as municipal solid waste. The
non-dedicated, non-disposable sampler weights were decontaminated using an alconox wash and
rinsed with distilled water between each sampling location. Samples were collected into
laboratory-supplied containers, labeled, and immediately placed on ice. Samples were hand
delivered to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment Laboratory (KDHEL) using
proper chain of custody procedures. All field forms, chain of custodies, laboratory analytical
reports, site maps, and the “HydraSleeve Field Manual” are attached as appendices.
HydraSleeve® Study
October 1, 2006
Page 2

2.1 Sample Analysis: Samples collected by KDHE with the HydraSleeve® were submitted to
KDHEL for analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Metals by EPA methods 8260
and 200.7, respectively. All samples were analyzed within holding times. All Laboratory
reports are attached as appendices. While a full list of 8260 and 200.7 constituents were
analyzed by KDHE, SAL facilities are monitored for an abbreviated list of constituents as per
K.A.R. 28-29-103(f). Those constituents and respective maximum contaminant levels (MCLs)
are listed in the table below. For the purposes of this study, only these 14 constituents were used
for comparative purposes.
Monitoring Constiuents for SALs
Table 1 - K.A.R. 28-29-103(f)
VOCs
MCL (mg/L) MCL (ug/L)
Benzene 0.005 5
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.005 5
1,1-Dichloroethene 0.007 7
1,2-Dichloropropane 0.005 5
Ethylebenzene 0.7 700
Styrene 0.1 100
Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 0.005 5
Toluene 1 1000
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.2 200
Trichloroethene (TCE) 0.005 5
Vinyl Chloride 0.002 2
Total Xylenes 10 10,000
Metals
Cadmium 0.005 5
Chromium 0.1 100
3.0 Study Results: A total of fifteen samples from three facilities were collected for
comparison. An additional 16 th well was sampled at the Pratt County SAL using the
HydraSleeve®; however, the well was purged dry and a sample was unable to be collected using
the standard sampling method. Results from each of the facilities is presented and discussed
individually below.
3.1 Thomas County SAL: Samples were collected from five monitoring wells, MW-3, MW-4,
MW-5, MW-7, and MW-8 on April 26, 2006. MILCO Environmental Services, Inc. (MILCO)
was present to conduct the 1 st Semiannual Sampling event for 2006. Monitoring wells MW-7
and MW-8 were installed on April 13, 2006 as required under new expansion and were sampled
for the first time during this event. All five wells were successfully sampled using both sampling
techniques. Analytical results are presented in the table below.
HydraSleeve® Study
October 1, 2006
Page 3

HydraSleeve Split Sampling Study Data
Thomas County SAL Results
HydraSleeve Samples
Purge Samples
VOCs (ug/L) MCL (ug/L) MW-3 MW-4 MW-5 MW-7 MW-8 MW-3 MW-4 MW-4Dup MW-5 MW-7 MW-8
Vinyl Chloride 2

3.2 Pratt County SAL: Samples were collected from five monitoring wells, MW-1, MW-2A,
MW-4, MW-5, and MW-6 on May 2, 2006. Allied Environmental Consultants, Inc. (AEC) was
present to conduct the 1 st Semiannual Sampling event for 2006. Pratt County SAL currently
monitors 6 wells semi-annually. Monitoring well MW-3A contained only 0.75 ft of water. By
placing a HydraSleeve® at the bottom of the well with a top weight, a half sampler volume was
able to be collected. The well then purged dry and a sample was unable to be collected using
traditional methods. The sample collected from the HydraSleeve® was not submitted for
analysis due to the lack of comparability at that location. While sufficient water was available to
fill the required containers for the KDHEL, it may not have resulted in enough water to meet
other laboratory’s required volumes without special arrangements. Pratt County SAL has
recently amended the list of parameters to be monitored at the request of KDHE. For the
purposes of this study, arsenic results were also used for comparative analysis since there were
detections during this event. Analytical results are presented in the table below.
HydraSleeve Split Sampling Study Data
Pratt County SAL Results
HydraSleeve Samples
Purge Samples
VOCs (ug/L) MCL (ug/L) MW-1 MW-2A MW-4 MW-5 MW-6 MW-1 MW-2A MW-4 MW-5 MW-6
Vinyl Chloride 2

samples. Historically, these metals have been detected at this facility at comparable levels.
Historical data shows trends of decreasing metals levels; however, the low level detections
appear to be persistent. In comparing the data from this event, the low level detections appear to
be similar. It should also be noted that detections are only slightly above laboratory detection
limits and that the detection limits of the two laboratories vary slightly. The HydraSleeve®
sampler provides a method of sampling that results in less agitation of water in the well, and thus
stirs up less sediment resulting in less turbid samples. Elevated or erroneous metals levels can
easily be attributed to suspended solids in ground water samples. While turbidity readings were
not collected for the HydraSleeve® samples, visual observation of samples notes much clearer
samples from the HydraSleeve®, prior to purging and bailing.
3.3 Rooks County SAL: Samples were collected from four monitoring wells, MW-11, MW-12,
MW-13, and MW-14 on May 3, 2006. Rooks County is currently approved to conduct their own
sampling events in lieu of obtaining the services of a consultant. Rooks County staff members
responsible for the landfill monitoring were present to conduct the 1 st Semiannual Sampling
event for 2006. Analytical results are presented in the table below.
HydraSleeve Split Sampling Study Data
Rooks County SAL Results
HydraSleeve Samples
Purge Samples
VOCs MCL (ug/L) MW-11 MW-12 MW-13 MW-14 MW-11 MW-12 MW-13 MW-14
Vinyl Chloride 2 0.7

4.0 Conclusions: Based on the observations and results of this limited test study it appears that
the HydraSleeve® sampling method would serve as a supplemental alternative sampling at the
Small Arid Landfill facilities, as well as other facilities throughout the state of Kansas. While
this limited study may not provide sufficient data for accurate statistical analysis, side-by-side
comparison of data collected as well as comparison with historical data and trends suggests that
using the HydraSleeve® for ground water monitoring can provide consistent results with current
traditional methods. While providing consistent and accurate data, the HydraSleeve® also
provides several added benefits for both KDHE and the regulated facilities.
The side-by-side data comparison does not result in exactly replicated data; however the
differences support many of the suggested advantages of using the HydraSleeve® over
traditional purge and bail methods. The HydraSleeve® method of sampling is intended to
reduce the agitation of well water during sampling to prevent volatilizing of constituents and
disturbance of fine sediments within the well that can cause erroneously elevated metals levels.
The HydraSleeve® sampler is also designed to be a closed sampling devise to eliminate potential
for additional off-gassing of VOCs when brought into contact with the air or cross contamination
when handling the sample while transferring to sample containers. These benefits would result
in more frequent low-level detections of VOCs in samples, where these lower levels may be
volatilized out using traditional methods. This may provide an additional benefit to both the
facilities and KDHE when monitoring around unlined landfills. Detecting potential impacts at a
lower level, sooner, may provide much needed time to implement corrective measures before the
levels reach those that would result in the loss of permit exemption as a SAL.
The same reduction in well disturbance and sample agitation also results in less turbid samples.
As is shown by the history of many SALs, elevated metals level detections have been a common
occurrence. When a constituent of concern is detected at a significant level or above a MCL, it is
stated in regulation that KDHE be notified within 14 days and a confirmation sampling event
conducted within 30 days of the original sampling date (K.A.R 28-29-103(f)(6)). In the case of
elevated metals detection, KDHE has historically accompanied the facility representative
sampler during the confirmation sampling to collect a split sample. The KDHE split sample
consists of a standard collection method sample and one that is field filtered and then submitted
to KDHEL for metals analysis. The facility sample is collected and submitted using standard
collection methods (unfiltered). Should the standard collection method sample analysis show
consistent findings of the original sampling event, and the filtered sample show a significant
reduction in metals levels, the original data is assumed to be erroneously elevated due to
sediment/matrix interference. This facility is then monitored for spikes in metals elevations and
the data collected from the confirmation event is considered background data upon which to
compare future results. Often times this process can result in multiple confirmation events at an
extra expense to both the facility and KDHE. If samples were able to be collected initially with a
method that eliminates much of this sediment/matrix interference, there would be a significant
reduction in these unnecessary events. Metals analysis would be more accurate and
representative of actual conditions at the facility.
Additionally, the HydraSleeve® method allows for sampling of wells containing significantly
less water. As chronic drought conditions continue across the state, and water levels continue to
HydraSleeve® Study
October 1, 2006
Page 7

decrease in many monitoring wells, this becomes a very important benefit for both KDHE and
the regulated facilities. This can prolong the life of existing wells allowing for much needed
time for the counties to plan and budget for new wells while still collecting consistent and
representative data for monitoring.
Lastly, the added benefit of time reduction and ease of collection using the HydraSleeve® can
simplify the monitoring process for many facilities. Sample collection using the HydraSleeve®
on average has been shown to take an average of 15 minutes per well. Purging and bailing a well
by hand to collect a sample can take considerably longer. Also, at many of the SALs, the wells
will purge dry and it is standard practice to revisit the well the next morning to collect a sample
once the well has recharged. Facilities that have retained a consultant to conduct sampling will
save money as the consultant saves time and money as less consultant hours are spent in the field
collecting data. Less equipment would be required for the sampling process and therefore often
less staff. In the case of facilities that conduct their own sampling (i.e. Rooks County SAL), the
ease of use with this method allows for easier training of personnel, reduction of time spent away
from regular duties, less need for bulky or expensive equipment (i.e. pumps if needed), and
eliminate the potential for error in the sampling process. In many cases with this sampling
method provided as an option, many additional SAL facilities might be able to opt to conduct
their own sampling events while retaining the services of a consultant to write the final report.
5.0 Recommendation: Based on the findings of this limited study and much research, it is my
opinion that the use of the HydraSleeve® for ground water monitoring be approved. While
providing consistent and accurate data, this method also allows facilities to take advantage of
many benefits should they chose to select this alternative method of sampling. Guidance should
be provided to the facilities and their consultants on the availability of the optional sampling
method and how to obtain individual approval and make the appropriate amendments to their
Sampling and Analysis Plans (SAP). This may include formulation of a Technical Guidance
Document outlining the request process. Facilities should provide written request to select the
new sampling method, and this request, upon approval, can be included in current SAPs as
addendum to eliminate the need for full resubmittal of the SAP. In order to document the
sampling procedure the “HydraSleeve® Field Manual” could be included as attachment.
Should facilities opt to begin conducting their own sampling, proper guidance should be given to
train the facility personnel responsible for sampling. This could be accomplished by having a
KDHE representative present during the first sampling event for training purposes.
Alternatively, a KDHE representative could be present at a facility that wishes to host a training
session for multiple counties located nearby.
HydraSleeve® Study
October 1, 2006
Page 8

Additional information regarding obtaining and use of the HydraSleeve® can be found at:
www.hydrasleeve.com or www.geoinsightonline.com. Or by contacting:
6.0 References:
Kent Cordry
GeoInsight
1680 Hickory Loop, Suite B
Las Cruces, NM 88005
(800) 996-2225
(505) 523-5799
(505 523-0789 (fax)
geoinsightonline@yahoo.com
Allied Environmental Consultants, Inc., Don A. Breit, P.G. May 18, 2006. “Semi-Annual
Monitoring Report, Pratt County Landfill Sampling Event – Spring 2006”.
Interstate Technology & Regulatory Council. March 2006. “Technology Overview of Passie
Sampler Technologies.
MILCO Environmental Services, Inc., Leah MacNeill. June 14, 2006. “Semi-Annual Sampling
Results, April 2006, Thomas County Landfill”.
PARSONS. October 2005. “Final – Results Report for the Demonstration of No-Purge
Groundwater Sampling Devices at Former CcClellan Air Force Base, California”.
Rooks County Landfill, Rich E. Bouchey. June 5, 2006. “Groundwater Sampling and Analysis
May Event, Rooks County Landfill, Rooks Co. Ks”.
www.hydrasleeve.com
HydraSleeve® Study
October 1, 2006
Page 9