Table of Contents

Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. The MTBE Field Experiment at CFB Borden, Ontario
3. Methods of Groundwater Sampling and Analysis
4. Sampling Strategy for the 1995-96 Sampling Rounds
5. The 1996 Sampling Results
     5.1.MTBE
        5.1.1 MTBE Coarse Grid Sampling Results
        5.1.2 MTBE Fine Grid Sampling Results
        5.1.3 Additional MTBE Sampling Results
     5.2.Tert-Butyl Alcohol (TBA) and Tert-Butyl Formate (TBF)
     5.3 Chloride
     5.4 BTEX
     5.5 Oxygen
     5.6 Sulfate
     5.7 Ammonia
6. Summary and Discussion
7. Future Work
References
Appendix A
Preliminary Modeling and Results of the 1995 Sampling Round
Appendix B
Two-Dimensional Modeling Using Random Hydraulic Conductivity Fields
Determination of the Optimal Grid Spacing Using Geostatistical Methods
List of Figures
2-1. Plan view position of the MTBE plume (upper) and the chloride plume
      (lower) 476 days after injection
2-2. Calculations of depth integrated concentrations using vertically
      distributed concentrations at a single sampling location
2-3. Mass of MTBE and C1 in the MTBE slug over the initial 476 days of
      snapshot monitoring
2-4. Mass of selected BTEX compounds in the MTBE slug over the initial
      476 days of snapshot monitoring
2-5. Corrected mass of MTBE and C1 in the MTBE slug over the initial 476
      days of snapshot monitoring
4-1. Cross section of the Borden field site with the injection area
      (source), the last sampling snapshot at 476 days and the
      anticipated plume location 7 years after injection
4-2. MTBE sampling results from the November 1995 sampling round with
      peak concentrations at each location in ug/L
4-3. Location of a conservative MTBE plume 2920 days after injection,
      based on modeling three separate realizations using Borden aquifer
      hydraulic properties
4-4. The anticipated MTBE plume 2920 days after injection with depth
      integrated concentrations in mg/m2
4-5. Sampling locations for the coarse grid sampling round in 1996
5-1. Sampling locations with depth integrated MTBE concentrations
      (mg/m2) for the coarse grid sampling round
5-2. Sampling locations with depth integrated MTBE concentrations
      (mg/m2) for the fine grid sampling round
5-3. Additional bundle piezometers installed along transect A-A'
      at locations B, C and D
5-4. Examples of MTBE depth profiles for the transect A-A'
List of Figures
5-5. Sampling locations with depth integrated total BTEX concentrations
      (mg/m2) for the fine grid sampling round
5-6. Dissolved oxygen concentrations (mg/L) at various depths at
      locations B, C and D using bundle piezometers
5-7. Examples of MTBE/Sulfate depth profiles for the transect A-A'
5-8. Sampling locations with depth integrated ammonia concentrations
      (g/m2) for the fine grid sampling round
6-1. Schematic cross section of the vertical MTBE concentration
      distribution from injection until 1996
6-2. Depth integrated and time corrected MTBE concentrations (mg/m2)
      for all sampling rounds
6-3. MTBE field mass estimates with the initial sampling rounds
      (up to 476 days) and the final sampling round about 8 years
      (3000 days) after injection
List of Tables
2-1. Mass and concentration of solutes initially injected and mass
      determined by snapshot sampling at later times
4-1. Minimum mass recovered from a simulated MTBE plume using different
      sampling grid designs

Abstract

A natural gradient tracer test was taken in 1988 in the Canada Forces Base Borden in shallow sand aquifer. This was to assess the fate of MTBE (methyl-tertiary-butyl ether) plume added to the aquifer. In 1995/96 a groundwater sampling program was performed to define the mass of MTBE still present in the acquifer.

General Product Information

Published
Document Type	Standard
Status	Current
Publisher	American Petroleum Institute
Pages
ISBN