HomeMy WebLinkAboutNC0001422_Table 6-7 Insitu Hydraulic Conductivity_20150805TABLE 6-7
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NC
Ash Basin
Well ID
Slug Test
Slug Test
Number
Hydraulic Conductivity
(cm/sec)
Measured Geometric
Mean
Hydraulic Conductivity
(ft/day)
Measured Geometric Mean
ABFIVV_ul�'
Slug In
Test 1
1.63E-04
9.01E-05
4.61E-01
2.55E-01
Test 2
9.99E-05
2.83E-01
Test 3
4.24E-05�
1.20E-01
Slug out
Test 1�
5.77E-05
1.64E-01
Test 2
1.02E-04
88 -21
Test 3
1.33E-04
3! E-01
ABMW-02S
Slug In
Test 1
8.07E-04
6.71E-04
2.29E+00
1.90E+00
Test 2
7.83E-04
2.22E+00
Test 3
7.81E-04
2.21E+00
Test 4
7.81E-04
2.21E+00
Slug Out
Test 3
5.48E-04
1.55E+00
Test 4
1 4.33E-04
1.23E+00
GEOGRAPHIC MEAN
2.46E-04
6.97E-01
HIGHEST CONDUCTIVITY
8!E-21
I
I 2.29E+00
LOWEST CONDUCTIVITY
2047E_05
I
I 1.20E-01
Note: Prepared by: RAG Checked by: HIF
Slug tests were analyzed using the Hvorslev mathmatical model.
-Springer and Gelhar mathmatical model was used due to undendamped response from BW-3S &AW-01C
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1 026\1 08. Sutton Ash Basin GWAssessment Plan\1.11 CSA Reporting\Tables\Report Tables\
Table 6-7 Insitu Hydraulic Conductivity Page 1 of 4
TABLE 6-7
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NC
Upper Surficial Aquifer
Well ID
Slug Test
Slug Test
Number
Hydraulic Conductivity
(cm/sec)
Measured Geometric Mean
Hydraulic Conductivity
(ft/day)
Measured Geometric Mean
ABMW-01D
Slug In
Test 1
1.64E-05
3.74E-05
4.64E-02
1.06E-01
Test 2
8.54E-05=�
2.42E-01
Slug Out
Test 3
2.06E-05
5.83E-02
AW O1BF-Slug
In
Test 1
3.92E-02
3.73E-02
1.11E+02
1.06E+02
Slug Out
Test 1
3.55E-02
1.01E+02
AW-02B
Slu1 In
Test 1
1.05E-02
8.72E-03
2.97E+01
2.47E+01
Test 2
8 0-
21
20 23
2.36E+01
�1E
Slug Out
Test 2
8! 5 E -
2.31E+01
Test 3
8. 13E-03
2.3 1 + 0 1H
AW-03B
Slug In
Test 1
4.36E-02
3.33E-02
1.24E+02
9.45E+01
Test 2
2.79E-02
7.90E+01
Test 3
3.36E-02
9.52E+01
2
Slug Out
Test 1
3.03E-02
8.59E4+01
AW-04B
Slu1 In
Test 1
6.06E-02
5.73E-02
1.72E+02
1. 17E+02
Test 2
5.42E-02
1.54E+02
Slug Out
Test 2
2. 13E-02
6.02E+01
AW O5B
Slug Out
Test 1
2.30E-03
2.30E-03
6.53E+00
6.53E+00
AW-06B
Slu In
Test 2
3.32E-02
3.99E-02
9.41E+01
1. 13E+02
S1ug Out
Test 1
4.80E-02
1.36E+02
S ucl out
Test 2
4.14E-02
1. 17E+02
AW-08B
1 In
F
12s! 1
4.31E-02
4.35E-02
14.22E+02
1.23E+02
Test
3.52E-02
9.97E+01
Test 3
3. lOE-02
8.78E+01
Slug Out
Test 2
4.97E-02
1.41E+02
Test 3
6.70E-02
1 go +0
1.90E+02
AW-09B
Slug In
Test 1
5.78E-02
6.22E-02
1.64E+02
1.76E+02
Slug In
Test 2
5.78E-02
1.64E+02
Slug Out
Test 1
7.00E-02
1.98E+02
Slug Out
Test 2
6.42E-02
1.82E+02
MW-37B
Slug In
Test 2
2.78E-02
2.56E-02
7.88E+01
7.25E+01
Test 3
2.62E-02
7.42E+01
Test 4
2. 11E-02
5.97E+01
Slug Out
Test 3
2.71E-02
7.67E+01
Test 4
2.64E-02
7.48E+01
SMW-01B
Slug Out
Test 2
4.74E-02
4.74E-02
1.34E+02
1.34E+02
SMW-02B
Slug In
Test 1
5.37E-03
5.18E -03
1.52E+01
1.47E+01
Slug In
Test 2
5. 13E-03
1.45E+01
Slug In
Test 3
4.92E-03
1.40E+01
Slug Out
Test 1
23
1.40E+01
Sluq Out
Test
592E-o
7E_ 3
1.52E+01
Sl q Out
Test 3
5.37E-03
1.52E+01
S MW -03B
Slug Out
Test 2
4.79E-02
4.77E -02
1.36E+02
1.35E+02
Sluq out
Test 3
4.75E-02
1.35E+02
SMW-04B
Slug In
Test 2
5.28E-02
5.34E-02
�2
11! �5 0 �_2
1.51E+02
Slug In
Test 3
5.40E-OH
5E -+� 0
SMW-05B
IF -Slug In
Test 1
5.34E-02
4.24E-02
1.51E+02
1.20E+02
I Sl cl In
Test 3
3.37E-02
9.54E+01
SVIW-06B
! I D
Test 1
1.98E-02
2.19E -02
5.62E+01
6.21E+01
Mugq 1 n
Test 2
2.32E-02
6.57E+01
Slug In
Test 3
2.71E-02
7.67E+01
-Slug out
Test 1
1.85E-02
5.25E+01
GEOMETRIC MEAN
1.66E-02
4.72E+01
HIGHEST CONDUCTIVITY
7.00E-02
1.98E+02
LOWEST CONDUCTIVITY
1.64E-05
4.64E-02
Note: Prepared by: RAG Checked by: HIF
Slug tests were analyzed using the Hvorslev mathmatical model.
-Springer and Gelhar mathmatical model was used due to undendamped response from BW-3S &AW-01C
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1 026\1 08. Sutton Ash Basin GW Assessment Plan\1.1 1 CSA Reporting\Tables\Report Tables\
Table 6-7 Insitu Hydraulic Conductivity Page 2 of 4
TABLE 6-7
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NC
Lower Surficial Aquifer
Well ID
Slug Test
Slug Test
Number
Hydraulic Conductivity
(cm/sec)
Measured Geometric
Mean
Hydraulic Conductivity
(ft/day)
Measured Geometric Mean
ABMW-02D
Slug In
Test 1
4.18E-02
2.84E-02
1.18E+02
8.04E+01
Test 2
2.38E-02
6.76E+01
Test 3
3.71E-02
1.05E+02
Test 4
3.76E-02
Slug Out
Test 1
1.90E-02
�1.07E+02
LEI 3
2.56E-02
TV 4
2. 19E-02
6.22E+01
AW-01c*
Slug In
Test 1
5. 18E-02
3.03E-02
1.47E+02
8.58E+01
Slug Out
Test 1
1.77E-02
5.01E+01
AW-02C
Slug In
Test 1
3.51E-02
3. 18E-02
9.94E+01
9.03E+01
Slug Out
Test 1
2.89E-02
8.20E+01
AW-03C
Slug In
Test 1
2.63E-02
3.23E-02
70.45E+01
8.43E+01
Test 2
2.49E-02
7.06E+01
Test 3
4.02E-02
1. 14E+02
Slug Out
Test 1
4.09E-02
1. 16E+02
Test 3
3.28E-02
9 0
9.30E+01
AW-04C
F-Slu In
Test 1
4.18E-02
3.65E-02
1. 18E+02
1.04E+02
Slug Out
Test 1
3.20E-02
9.06E+01
AW-05C
Slug Out
Test 3
4.16E-02
4.59E-02
I EE ±2
1.30E+02
r1ug Out
Test 4
5.07E-02
1!:18
i� +02
AW-08C*
Slug In
I
Test 1
2.70E-02
2.64E-02
7.64E+01
7.48E+01
Test 2
1.67E-02
4.72E+01
Test 3
3.14E-02
8.91E+01
Slug Out
Test
3.00E-02
8.50E+01
Test 2
2.38E-02
6.74E+01
Test 3
3.37E-02
9.54E+01
AW-09C
Out
Test 1
4.79E-02
4.41E-02
1± 2
21 �5 EE
1.25E+02
1�- -Slug
I Slug Out
I Test 2
1 4.05E-02
1! +02
MW-31C
Slug In
I
Test 1
9.23E-03
8.25E-03
2.62E+01
2.34E+01
Test 2
9.07E-03
2.57E+01
Test 3
9.38E-03
2.66E+01
Slug Out
Test 1
5 .84E-03
2.22E+01
Test 2
7.30E-03
2.07E+01
Test 3
7.04E-03
2.00E+01
MW-37C
Slu1 In
12sj 1
3. 12E-02
3.80E-02
8.85E+01
1.08E+02
Test
5.72E-02
1.62E+02
�10
Test 3
3.76E-02
1.07E+02
Slug Out
Test 2
3. 12E-02
8.84E+01
SMW-01C
Slug In
Test 3
4.21E-02
4.49E-02
9E ±
1.27E+02
1
IF: -SSl 'lug Out
Test 3
4.79E-0 H
02
M
ItE 2
S MW -02C
Slug In
Test 1
5.59E-02
5.43E -02
1.58E+02
1.54E+02
Slug In
Test 2
4.14E-02
1. 17E+02
Slug In
Test 3
2.72E-02
1.62E+02
Sluq Out
Test 1
5 .57E-02
1.58E+02
Sluq Out
Test 2
5.66E-02
1.60E+02
Sl q Out
Test 3
6.14E-02
1.74E+02
SMW-03C
Slug In
Test 1
3.75E-02
3.96L-02
1.06E+02
1. 12E+02
Slug In
Test 2
3.22E-02
9.12E+01
Slug In
Test 3
3.34E-02
9.47E+01
Sluq Out
Test 1
3.71E-02
1.05E+02
Sluq Out
Test 2
5.66E-02
1.60E+02
Slug Out
Test 3
4.54E-02
1.29E+02
SMW-04C
Slug Out
Test 2
6.08E-02
6.08E-02
1.72E+02
1.72E+02
SMW-05C
Sl [__uq In
Test 1
4.35E-0 2
4.75E-02
1 2 E ± 2
1.35E+02
Slug Out
Test 1
5.20E-OH
1! �2
I 7E +02
SVIW-06C
L-
Slu�
Test 1
1.87E-02
2.06E-02
5.30E+01
5.85E+01
Slug In
Test 2
2.22E-02
6.29E+01
Slug In
Test 3
2.45E-02
6.96E+01
F SlugOutTest
2
2.04E-02
5.78E+01
Slug Out
Test 3
1.81E-02
5.12E+01
GEOMETRIC MEAN
3.02E-02
8.55E+01
HIGHEST CONDUCTIVITY
6.14E-02
1.74E+02
LOWEST CONDUCTIVITY
1 7.04E-03
I
2.00E+01
Note: Prepared by: RAG Checked by: HIF
Slug tests were analyzed using the Hvorslev mathmatical model.
*Springer and Gelhar mathmatical model was used due to undendamped response from 3W-3S &AW-01C
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1 026\1 08. Sutton Ash Basin GWAssessment Plan\1.11 CSA Reporting\Tables\Report Tables\
Table 6-7 Insitu Hydraulic Conductivity Page 3 of 4
TABLE 6-7
HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY
L.V. SUTTON ENERGY COMPLEX
DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, INC., WILMINGTON, NC
Upper Pee Dee Aquifer
Well ID
Slug Test
I
j
Slug Test
Number
Hydraulic Conductivity
Measured
Geometric
Mean
Hydraulic
Measured
Conductivity
Geometric Mean I
AW-02D
Slu -In
Test 1
2.64E-05
1.37E-05
7.48E-02
3.89E-02
S l u Out
ug
----
Test 1
F7. 16E-06
2.03E-02
Slu In
FAW-05D
Test 1
1.18E-04
1.14E -04
3.35E-01
3.23E-01
'Sl ug0ut '---
F Test 1
1.09E-04
3. lOE-01
AW-06D
Slu In
Test 1
6.22E-06
-1
2.37E-06
1.76E-02
6.71E-03
I Slug Out
Test 1
9.02E-07
2.56E-03
AW-07D
I Slug In
IF
Test 1
2.01E-05
1.69E-05
5.71E-02
4.80E-02
-Slug Out
Test 1
1.42E-05
4.03E-02
AW 09D
Slu In
Test 1
2.73E-05
1.23E-05
7.74E-02
3.49E-02
I Slug Out
Test 1
5.54E-06
1.57E-02
F-s-m-w--665-11Slu
Out
Test 1
1 3. 13E-06
3. 13E-06
8.88E-03
8.88E-03
GEOMETRIC MEAN
1.30E-05
3.70E-02
HIGHEST CONDUCTIVITY
1. 18E-04
3.35E-01
LOWEST CONDUCTIVITY
9.02E-07
2.56E-03
Lower Pee Dee Aquifer
Hydraulic Conductivity
Hydraulic Conductivity
Well ID
Slug Test
Slug Test
Number
(cm/sec)
Geometric
Measured Mean
I
(ft/day)
Measured Geometric Mean
AW-05E
Slu In
Test 1
1.35E-06
7. 11E-07
I
3.83E-03
2.01E-03
Slug Out
Test 1
3.74E-07
1.06E-03
Slug In
Test 1
1.95E-07
1. 19E-07
5.52E-04
3.36E-04
Slug Out
Test 1
7.21E-08
2.05E-04
Slug Out
Test 1
2.08E-07
2.08E-07
5.90E-04
5.90E-04
GEOMETRIC MEAN
2.72E-07
7.70E-04
HIGHEST CONDUCTIVITY
1.35E-06
3.83E-03
LOWEST CONDUCTIVITY
7.21E-08
2.05E-04
Note: Prepared by: RAG Checked by: HIF
Slug tests were analyzed using the Hvorslev mathmatical model.
-Springer and Gelhar mathmatical model was used due to undendamped response from BW-3S &AW-01C
P:\Duke Energy Progress. 1 026\1 08. Sutton Ash Basin GWAssessment Plan\1.11 CSA Reporting\Tables\Report Tables\
Table 6-7 Insitu Hydraulic Conductivity Page 4 of 4