D18.21 - Groundwater and Vadose Zone Investigations

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The process of operating any engineered system, such as monitoring wells, includes active maintenance to prevent, mitigate, or reverse deterioration. Lack of or improper maintenance can lead to well performance deficiencies (physical problems) or sample quality degradation (chemical problems). These problems are intrinsic to monitoring wells, which are often left idle for long periods of time (as long as a year), installed in non-aquifer materials, and installed to evaluate contamination that can cause locally anomalous hydrogeochemical conditions. The typical solutions for these physical and chemical problems that would be applied by owners and operators of water supply, dewatering, recharge, and other wells may not be appropriate for monitoring wells because of the need to minimize their impact on the conditions that monitoring wells were installed to evaluate.  
4.2 This guide covers actions and procedures, but is not an encyclopedic guide to well maintenance. Well maintenance planning and execution is highly site and well specific.  
4.3 The design of maintenance and rehabilitation programs and the identification of the need for rehabilitation should be based on objective observation and testing, and by individuals knowledgeable and experienced in well maintenance and rehabilitation. Users of this guide are encouraged to consult the references provided.  
4.4 For additional information see Test Methods D4412, D5472/D5472M, D7726 and Guides D4448, D5254/D5254M, D5521/D5521M, D5409/D5409M, D5410 and D5474.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers an approach to selecting and implementing a well maintenance and rehabilitation program for groundwater monitoring wells. It provides information on symptoms of problems or deficiencies that indicate the need for maintenance and rehabilitation. It is limited to monitoring wells, that are designed and operated to provide access to, representative water samples from, and information about the hydraulic properties of the saturated subsurface while minimizing impact on the monitored zone. Some methods described herein may apply to other types of wells although the range of maintenance and rehabilitation treatment methods suitable for monitoring wells is more restricted than for other types of wells. Monitoring wells include their associated pumps and surface equipment.  
1.2 This guide is affected by governmental regulations and by site specific geological, hydrogeological, geochemical, climatological, and biological conditions.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units presented in brackets are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Sonic drilling is a rapid, primarily dry drilling method (see 5.2), used both in geotechnical applications to avoid hydraulic fracturing, and in environmental site exploration. Geotechnical applications include exploration for tunnels, underground excavations, and installation of instrumentation or structural elements. Sonic drilling methods are used in rocky soils with large diameter casing to obtain continuous samples in materials that are difficult to sample using other methods. It is well suited for projects of a production-orientated nature with a drilling rate faster than most all other drilling methods (Guide D6286/D6286M). Sonic drilling is used for environmental explorations because sonic drilling offers the benefit of significantly reduced drill cuttings, a major cost element, and reduced drill fluid use and production. Sonic drilling offers rapid formation penetration thereby increasing production. It can reduce fieldwork time generating overall project cost reductions. The continuous core sample recovered provides a representative lithological column for review and analysis. Sonic drilling readily lends itself to environmental instrumentation installation and to in-situ testing. The advantage of a clean cased hole without the use of drilling fluids provides for increased efficiency in instrumentation installation. The ability to cause vibration to the casing string eliminates the complication of monitoring well backfill bridging common to other drilling methods and reduces the risk of casing lockup allowing for easy casing withdrawal during grouting. The clean borehole reduces well development time. Pumping tests can be performed as needed prior to well screen placement to allow for proper screen location. The sonic method is readily utilized in multiple cased well applications which are required to prevent aquifer cross contamination. The installation of inclinometers, vibrating wire piezometers, settlement gauges, and the like can be accomplished e...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for using sonic drilling methods in the conducting of subsurface exploration for site characterization and in the installation of subsurface monitoring devices.  
1.2 The use of the sonic drilling method for exploration and monitoring-device installation may often involve preliminary site research and safety planning, administration, and documentation.  
1.3 Soil or Rock samples collected by sonic methods are classed as group A or group B in accordance with Practices D4220/D4220M. Other sampling methods (Guide D6169/D6169M) may be used in conjunction with the sonic method to collect samples classed as group C and Group D. Other drilling methods are summarized in Guide D6286/D6286M.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units [presented in brackets] are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than in-pound shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this practice.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. It is a description of the present state-of-the-art practice of sonic drilling. It does not recommend this method as a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged,...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Wireline casing advancement may be used in support of geoenvironmental exploration and for installation of subsurface monitoring devices in both unconsolidated and consolidated materials. Use of direct-rotary wireline casing-advancement drilling methods with fluids are applicable to a wide variety of consolidated or unconsolidated materials as long as fluid circulation can be maintained. Wireline casing-advancement drilling offers the advantages of high drilling-penetration rates in a wide variety of materials with the added benefit of the large-diameter drilling rod serving as protective casing. Wireline coring does not require tripping in and out of the hole each time a core is obtained. The drill rods need only be removed when the coring bit is worn or damaged or if the inner core barrel becomes stuck in the outer barrel.  
5.1.1 Wireline casing advancers may be adapted for use with circulating air under pressure for sampling water-sensitive materials where fluid exposure may alter the core or in cavernous materials or lost circulation occurs (1, 2).4 Several advantages of using the air-rotary drilling method over other methods may include the ability to drill rather rapidly through consolidated materials and, in many instances, not require the introduction of drilling fluids to the borehole. Air-rotary drilling techniques are usually employed to advance the borehole when water-sensitive materials (that is, friable sandstones or collapsible soils) may preclude use of water-based rotary-drilling methods. Some disadvantages to air-rotary drilling may include poor borehole integrity in unconsolidated materials when casing is not used and the possible volatilization of contaminants and air-borne dust. Air drilling may not be satisfactory in unconsolidated or cohesionless soils, or both, when drilling below the groundwater table. In some instances, water or foam additives, or both, may be injected into the air stream to improve cuttings-lifting capacity and cutti...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers how direct (straight) wireline rotary casing advancement drilling and sampling procedures may be used for geoenvironmental exploration and installation of subsurface water-quality monitoring devices.  
Note 1: The term “direct” with respect to the rotary drilling method of this guide indicates that a water-based drilling fluid or air is injected through a drill-rod column to rotating bit(s) or coring bit. The fluid or air cools the bit(s) and transports cuttings to the surface in the annulus between the drill rod column and the borehole wall.
Note 2: This guide does not include the procedures for fluid rotary systems which are addressed in a separate guide, Guide D5783.  
1.2 The term “casing advancement” is sometimes used to describe rotary wireline drilling because the center pilot bit or core barrel assemblies may be removed and the large inside diameter drill rods can act as a temporary casing for testing or installation of monitoring devices. This guide addresses casing-advancement equipment in which the drill rod (casing) is advanced by rotary force applied to the bit with application of static downforce to aid in the cutting process.  
1.3 This guide includes several forms of rotary wireline drilling configurations. General borehole advancement may be performed without sampling by using a pilot roller cone or drag bit until the desired depth is reached. Alternately, the material may be continuously or incrementally sampled by replacing the pilot bit with a core-barrel assembly designed for coring either rock or soil. Rock coring should be performed in accordance with Practice D2113.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or Inch-Pound units given in brackets are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exactly equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two system may result i...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide describes a general approach for the use of existing wells in environmental investigations with a primary focus on the subsurface and major factors affecting the surface and subsurface environment.  
4.2 Existing wells represent a valuable source of information for subsurface environmental investigations. Specific uses of existing wells include:  
4.2.1 Well driller logs provide information on subsurface lithology and major water-bearing units in an area. Existing wells can also offer access for downhole geophysical logging for stratigraphic and aquifer interpretations. Examples include natural gamma logs in cased wells and an entire suite of methods in uncased bedrock wells (see Guide D5753). This information can assist in developing the preliminary conceptual model of the site.  
4.2.2 Well tests using existing wells may provide information on the hydrologic characteristics of an aquifer.  
4.2.3 Monitoring of water levels in existing wells, provided that they are cased in the aquifer of interest, allow development of potentiometric maps and interpretations of groundwater flow directions and gradients.  
4.2.4 Existing wells are the primary means by which regional drinking water quality is evaluated and monitored.  
4.2.5 Existing wells may assist in the mapping of contaminant plumes, and in ongoing monitoring of groundwater quality changes at the site-specific level.  
4.3 Data from existing wells should only be used when characteristics of the well have been sufficiently documented to determine that they satisfy criteria for the purpose for which the data are to be used.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the use of existing wells for environmental site characterization and monitoring. It covers the following major topics: criteria for determining the suitability of existing wells for hydrogeologic characterization and groundwater quality monitoring, types of data needed to document the suitability of an existing well, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of existing large- and small-capacity wells.  
1.2 This guide should be used in conjunction with Guide D5730, that provides a general approach for environmental site investigations.  
1.3 This guide does not specifically address design and construction of new monitoring or supply wells. Refer to Practices D5092/D5092M and D5787.  
1.4 This guide does not specifically address groundwater sampling procedures. Refer to Guide D5903.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This guide cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this guide be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Field QA demonstrates the effectiveness of field quality control procedures. Effective QA facilitates the collection of statistically significant data that is defendable scientifically and in a court of law. QA also involves the use of consistent procedures, increasing the validity of data comparison among sampling locations and events.  
4.2 This guide should be used by a professional or technician who has training or experience in groundwater sampling.
Note 1: The quality of the results produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the quality assurance (QA) methods that may be used to assure the validity of data obtained during the sampling of a groundwater monitoring well. QA is any action taken to ensure that performance requirements are met by following standards and procedures. Following QA practices becomes even more critical if the data must be validated in a court of law. Under certain conditions, it may be necessary to follow additional or different QA practices from those listed in this guide. QA practices should be based upon data quality objectives, site-specific conditions, and regulatory requirements.  
1.2 This standard addresses QA procedures used in the field and does not refer to laboratory QA procedures.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This standard provides guidance for selecting and performing various field QA procedures. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgement. Not all of the procedures are applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A correctly designed, installed and developed groundwater monitoring well, constructed in accordance with Practice D5092/D5092M, should facilitate collection of samples of groundwater that can be analyzed to determine both the physical and chemical properties of that sample. Samples collected from these wells that require analysis for dissolved constituents should be filtered in the field prior to chemical preservation and shipment to the laboratory for analysis.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers methods for field filtration of groundwater samples collected from groundwater monitoring wells, excluding samples that contain non-aqueous phase liquids (either Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs) or Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPLs)). Methods of field filtration described herein could also be applied to samples collected from wells used for other purposes. Laboratory filtration methods are not described in this guide.  
1.2 This guide provides procedures available for field filtration of groundwater samples. The need for sample filtration for specific analytes should be defined prior to the sampling event and documented in the site-specific sampling and analysis plan in accordance with Guide D5903. The decision should be made on a parameter-specific basis with consideration of the data quality objectives of the sampling program, any applicable regulatory agency guidelines, and analytical method requirements.  
1.3 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This guide cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service to be judged, nor should this guide be applied without consideration of the many unique aspects of a project. The word “Standard” in the title of this guide means only that the guide has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI Units or inch-pound units given in brackets are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Wireline casing advancement may be used in support of geoenvironmental exploration and for installation of subsurface monitoring devices in both unconsolidated and consolidated materials. Use of direct-rotary wireline casing-advancement drilling methods with fluids are applicable to a wide variety of consolidated or unconsolidated materials as long as fluid circulation can be maintained. Wireline casing-advancement drilling offers the advantages of high drilling-penetration rates in a wide variety of materials with the added benefit of the large-diameter drilling rod serving as protective casing. Wireline coring does not require tripping in and out of the hole each time a core is obtained. The drill rods need only be removed when the coring bit is worn or damaged or if the inner core barrel becomes stuck in the outer barrel.  
5.1.1 Wireline casing advancers may be adapted for use with circulating air under pressure for sampling water-sensitive materials where fluid exposure may alter the core or in cavernous materials or lost circulation occurs (1, 2).4 Several advantages of using the air-rotary drilling method over other methods may include the ability to drill rather rapidly through consolidated materials and, in many instances, not require the introduction of drilling fluids to the borehole. Air-rotary drilling techniques are usually employed to advance the borehole when water-sensitive materials (that is, friable sandstones or collapsible soils) may preclude use of water-based rotary-drilling methods. Some disadvantages to air-rotary drilling may include poor borehole integrity in unconsolidated materials when casing is not used and the possible volatilization of contaminants and air-borne dust. Air drilling may not be satisfactory in unconsolidated or cohesionless soils, or both, when drilling below the groundwater table. In some instances, water or foam additives, or both, may be injected into the air stream to improve cuttings-lifting capacity and cutti...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers how direct (straight) wireline rotary casing advancement drilling and sampling procedures may be used for geoenvironmental exploration and installation of subsurface water-quality monitoring devices.  
Note 1: The term “direct” with respect to the rotary drilling method of this guide indicates that a water-based drilling fluid or air is injected through a drill-rod column to rotating bit(s) or coring bit. The fluid or air cools the bit(s) and transports cuttings to the surface in the annulus between the drill rod column and the borehole wall.
Note 2: This guide does not include the procedures for fluid rotary systems which are addressed in a separate guide, Guide D5783.  
1.2 The term “casing advancement” is sometimes used to describe rotary wireline drilling because the center pilot bit or core barrel assemblies may be removed and the large inside diameter drill rods can act as a temporary casing for testing or installation of monitoring devices. This guide addresses casing-advancement equipment in which the drill rod (casing) is advanced by rotary force applied to the bit with application of static downforce to aid in the cutting process.  
1.3 This guide includes several forms of rotary wireline drilling configurations. General borehole advancement may be performed without sampling by using a pilot roller cone or drag bit until the desired depth is reached. Alternately, the material may be continuously or incrementally sampled by replacing the pilot bit with a core-barrel assembly designed for coring either rock or soil. Rock coring should be performed in accordance with Practice D2113.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or Inch-Pound units given in brackets are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exactly equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two system may result i...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide describes a general approach for the use of existing wells in environmental investigations with a primary focus on the subsurface and major factors affecting the surface and subsurface environment.  
4.2 Existing wells represent a valuable source of information for subsurface environmental investigations. Specific uses of existing wells include:  
4.2.1 Well driller logs provide information on subsurface lithology and major water-bearing units in an area. Existing wells can also offer access for downhole geophysical logging for stratigraphic and aquifer interpretations. Examples include natural gamma logs in cased wells and an entire suite of methods in uncased bedrock wells (see Guide D5753). This information can assist in developing the preliminary conceptual model of the site.  
4.2.2 Well tests using existing wells may provide information on the hydrologic characteristics of an aquifer.  
4.2.3 Monitoring of water levels in existing wells, provided that they are cased in the aquifer of interest, allow development of potentiometric maps and interpretations of groundwater flow directions and gradients.  
4.2.4 Existing wells are the primary means by which regional drinking water quality is evaluated and monitored.  
4.2.5 Existing wells may assist in the mapping of contaminant plumes, and in ongoing monitoring of groundwater quality changes at the site-specific level.  
4.3 Data from existing wells should only be used when characteristics of the well have been sufficiently documented to determine that they satisfy criteria for the purpose for which the data are to be used.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the use of existing wells for environmental site characterization and monitoring. It covers the following major topics: criteria for determining the suitability of existing wells for hydrogeologic characterization and groundwater quality monitoring, types of data needed to document the suitability of an existing well, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of existing large- and small-capacity wells.  
1.2 This guide should be used in conjunction with Guide D5730, that provides a general approach for environmental site investigations.  
1.3 This guide does not specifically address design and construction of new monitoring or supply wells. Refer to Practices D5092/D5092M and D5787.  
1.4 This guide does not specifically address groundwater sampling procedures. Refer to Guide D5903.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This guide cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This guide is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this guide be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The process of operating any engineered system, such as monitoring wells, includes active maintenance to prevent, mitigate, or reverse deterioration. Lack of or improper maintenance can lead to well performance deficiencies (physical problems) or sample quality degradation (chemical problems). These problems are intrinsic to monitoring wells, which are often left idle for long periods of time (as long as a year), installed in non-aquifer materials, and installed to evaluate contamination that can cause locally anomalous hydrogeochemical conditions. The typical solutions for these physical and chemical problems that would be applied by owners and operators of water supply, dewatering, recharge, and other wells may not be appropriate for monitoring wells because of the need to minimize their impact on the conditions that monitoring wells were installed to evaluate.  
4.2 This guide covers actions and procedures, but is not an encyclopedic guide to well maintenance. Well maintenance planning and execution is highly site and well specific.  
4.3 The design of maintenance and rehabilitation programs and the identification of the need for rehabilitation should be based on objective observation and testing, and by individuals knowledgeable and experienced in well maintenance and rehabilitation. Users of this guide are encouraged to consult the references provided.  
4.4 For additional information see Test Methods D4412, D5472/D5472M, D7726 and Guides D4448, D5254/D5254M, D5521/D5521M, D5409/D5409M, D5410 and D5474.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers an approach to selecting and implementing a well maintenance and rehabilitation program for groundwater monitoring wells. It provides information on symptoms of problems or deficiencies that indicate the need for maintenance and rehabilitation. It is limited to monitoring wells, that are designed and operated to provide access to, representative water samples from, and information about the hydraulic properties of the saturated subsurface while minimizing impact on the monitored zone. Some methods described herein may apply to other types of wells although the range of maintenance and rehabilitation treatment methods suitable for monitoring wells is more restricted than for other types of wells. Monitoring wells include their associated pumps and surface equipment.  
1.2 This guide is affected by governmental regulations and by site specific geological, hydrogeological, geochemical, climatological, and biological conditions.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units presented in brackets are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D 6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Sonic drilling is a rapid, primarily dry drilling method (see 5.2), used both in geotechnical applications to avoid hydraulic fracturing, and in environmental site exploration. Geotechnical applications include exploration for tunnels, underground excavations, and installation of instrumentation or structural elements. Sonic drilling methods are used in rocky soils with large diameter casing to obtain continuous samples in materials that are difficult to sample using other methods. It is well suited for projects of a production-orientated nature with a drilling rate faster than most all other drilling methods (Guide D6286/D6286M). Sonic drilling is used for environmental explorations because sonic drilling offers the benefit of significantly reduced drill cuttings, a major cost element, and reduced drill fluid use and production. Sonic drilling offers rapid formation penetration thereby increasing production. It can reduce fieldwork time generating overall project cost reductions. The continuous core sample recovered provides a representative lithological column for review and analysis. Sonic drilling readily lends itself to environmental instrumentation installation and to in-situ testing. The advantage of a clean cased hole without the use of drilling fluids provides for increased efficiency in instrumentation installation. The ability to cause vibration to the casing string eliminates the complication of monitoring well backfill bridging common to other drilling methods and reduces the risk of casing lockup allowing for easy casing withdrawal during grouting. The clean borehole reduces well development time. Pumping tests can be performed as needed prior to well screen placement to allow for proper screen location. The sonic method is readily utilized in multiple cased well applications which are required to prevent aquifer cross contamination. The installation of inclinometers, vibrating wire piezometers, settlement gauges, and the like can be accomplished e...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for using sonic drilling methods in the conducting of subsurface exploration for site characterization and in the installation of subsurface monitoring devices.  
1.2 The use of the sonic drilling method for exploration and monitoring-device installation may often involve preliminary site research and safety planning, administration, and documentation.  
1.3 Soil or Rock samples collected by sonic methods are classed as group A or group B in accordance with Practices D4220/D4220M. Other sampling methods (Guide D6169/D6169M) may be used in conjunction with the sonic method to collect samples classed as group C and Group D. Other drilling methods are summarized in Guide D6286/D6286M.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either inch-pound units or SI units [presented in brackets] are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than in-pound shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this practice.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. It is a description of the present state-of-the-art practice of sonic drilling. It does not recommend this method as a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged,...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method is useful as a repeatable, nondestructive technique to monitor in-place density and moisture of soil and rock along lengthy sections of horizontal, slanted, and vertical access holes or tubes. With proper calibration in accordance with Annex A1, this test method can be used to quantify changes in density and moisture content of soil and rock.  
5.2 This test method is used in vadose zone monitoring, for performance assessment of engineered barriers at waste facilities, and for research related to monitoring the movement of liquids (water solutions and hydrocarbons) through soil and rock. The nondestructive nature of the test allows repetitive measurements at a site and statistical analysis of results.  
5.3 The fundamental assumptions inherent in the density measurement portion of this test method are that Compton scattering and photoelectric absorption are the dominant interactions of the gamma rays with the material under test.  
5.4 The probe response, in counts, can be converted to wet density by comparing the detected rate of gamma radiation with previously established calibration data (see Annex A1).  
5.5 The probe count response may also be utilized directly for unitless, relative comparison with other probe readings.  
5.5.1 For materials of densities higher than that of about the density of water, higher count rates within the same soil type relate to lower densities and, conversely, lower count rates within the same soil type relate to higher densities.  
5.5.2 For materials of densities lower than the density of water, higher count rates within the same soil type relate to higher densities and, conversely, lower count rates within the same soil type relate to lower densities.  
5.5.3 Because of the functional inflection of probe response for densities near the density of water, exercise great care when drawing conclusions from probe response in this density range.  
5.6 The fundamental assumption inherent in the moisture meas...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers collection and comparison of logs of thermalized-neutron counts and back-scattered gamma counts along horizontal or vertical air-filled access tubes.  
1.2 For limitations, see Section 6, “Interferences.”  
1.3 The in situ water content in mass per unit volume and the density in mass per unit volume of soil and rock at positions or in intervals along the length of an access tube are calculated by comparing the thermal neutron count rate and gamma count rates respectively to previously established calibration data.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system are not necessarily exact equivalents; therefore, to ensure conformance with the standard, each system shall be used independently of the other, and values from the two systems shall not be combined. Within the text of this standard, SI units appear first followed by the inch-pound (or other non-SI) units in brackets  
1.4.1 Reporting the test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with the standard.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guide for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected, recorded, and calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.  
1.6 This standard does not ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Ground water samples are subject to chemical, physical, and biological change relative to in- situ conditions at the ground surfaces as a result of exposure to ambient conditions during sample collection (for example, pressure, temperature, ultraviolet radiation, atmospheric oxygen, and contaminants) (1) (2).6 Physical and chemical preservation of samples minimize further changes in sample chemistry that can occur from the moment the ground water sample is retrieved, to the time it is removed from the sample container for extraction or analysis, or both. Measures also should be taken to preserve the physical integrity of the sample container.  
4.2 The need for sample preservation for specific analytes should be defined prior to the sampling event and documented in the site-specific sampling and analysis plan in accordance with Guide D5903. The decision to preserve a sample should be made on a parameter-specific basis as defined by individual analytical methods.  
4.3 This guide includes examples from government documents in the United States. When work is in other countries or regions, the local governing or regulating agencies should be consulted.  
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers methods for field preservation of ground water samples from the point of sampling through receipt at the laboratory. Laboratory preservation methods are not described in this guide. Purging and sampling techniques are not addressed in this standard but are addressed in Guides D6564/D6564M, D6634/D6634M, D7929, and Practice D6771.  
1.2 Ground water samples are subject to chemical, physical, and biological change relative to in situ conditions at the ground surfaces due to exposure to ambient conditions during sample collection. Physical and chemical preservation of samples minimize further changes in sample chemistry that can occur from the moment the ground water sample is retrieved, to the time it is removed from the sample container for extraction or analysis.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word“ Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Purging is done for a variety of reasons and the purging method may depend on the hydrogeologic setting, condition of the well, or the contaminants of interest and well production rates. well hydrological conditions, condition of the well, or the contaminants of interest, and well production rates. This guide presents an approach for selecting an appropriate purging method if purging is to be performed., Water above the screened interval or open borehole may not accurately reflect ambient ground water chemistry.
Note 1: Some sampling methods, such as passive sampling, do not require the practice of purging prior to sample collection (1,2).3  
4.2 There are various methods for purging. Each purging method may have a different volume of influence within the aquifer or screened interval. Therefore, a sample collected after purging by any one method is not necessarily equivalent to samples collected after purging by the other methods. The selection of the appropriate method will be dependent on several factors, which should be defined during the development of the sampling and analysis plan. This guide describes the methods available and defines the circumstances under which each method may be appropriate.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers methods for purging wells used for ground water quality investigations and monitoring programs. These methods could be used for other types of programs but are not addressed in this guide.  
1.2 This guide applies only to wells sampled at the wellhead.  
1.3 This standard describes seven methods (A-G) for the selection of purging methods.
Method A—Fixed Volume Purging,
Method B—Purging Based on Stabilization of Indicator Parameters,
Method C—Purging Based on Stabilization of Target Analytes,
Method D—Purging Based on Fixed Volume Combined with Indicator Parameter Stabilization,
Method E—Low Flow/Low Volume (Minimal Drawdown) Purging,
Method F—Well Evacuation Purging, and
Method G—Use of Packers in Purging.  
1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this guide means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
This guide covers what and how information should be recorded in the field when sampling a ground-water monitoring well. This guide is limited to written documentation of a ground-water sampling event. When sampling ground-water monitoring wells, it is very important to thoroughly document all field activities. It is important to record procedures used and measurements immediately after they have been accomplished and are fresh in the memory. The format of the documentation is discretionary, but should be consistent from well to well and in accordance with regulatory requirements.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 When sampling groundwater monitoring wells, it is very important to thoroughly document all field activities. Sufficient field data should be retained to allow one to reconstruct the procedures and conditions that may have affected the integrity of a sample. The field data generated are vital to the interpretation of the chemical data obtained from laboratory analyses of samples. Field data and observations may also be useful to analytical laboratory personnel.  
4.2 Due to the changing nature of regulations and other information, users are advised to thoroughly research requirements related to packaging and shipping prior to initiating a sampling event.
Note 1: The sampling of an individual groundwater monitoring well should be repeated as closely as possible each time the monitoring well is sampled. This reduces the variability of the chemical parameters due to sampling variability which is the desired result. The intent is to detect the change in chemistry by repeating the sampling protocol at each individual well. This does not mean that all the wells are sampled the same way, nor does it prohibit changes in the sampling protocol, provided they are planned and documented.
Note 2: The quality of the results produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers what and how information should be recorded in the field when sampling a groundwater monitoring well. Following these recommendations will provide adequate documentation in most monitoring programs. In some situations, it may be necessary to record additional or different information, or both, to thoroughly document the sampling event. In other cases, it may not be necessary to record all of the information recommended in this guide. The level of documentation will be based on site-specific conditions and regulatory requirements.  
1.2 This guide is limited to written documentation of a groundwater sampling event. Other methods of documentation (that is, electronic and audiovisual) can be used but are not addressed in this guide. The specific activities addressed in this guide include documentation of static water level measurement, monitoring well purging, monitoring well sampling, field measurements, groundwater sample preparation, and groundwater sample shipment.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be appli...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide is intended to provide a systematic approach for the application and execution of early actions for purposes of remediating both hazardous and non-hazardous contamination. Iterative development of a CSM is fundamental to the use of this guide.  
5.2 Anticipated users of this guide are owners or operators at sites of environmental contamination; technical professionals involved in the field of environmental site characterization and remediation; environmental regulators, property owners, employees, and residents adjacent to sites of environmental contamination; and lenders, sureties, and persons of general interest within an affected community.  
5.3 This guide is not intended to replace legal requirements for remediating sites of environmental contamination. This guide should be used to supplement existing regulatory guidance and to focus remedial efforts toward final remedy solutions.
Note 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to assist practitioners in the development, selection, design, and implementation of interim, short-term, or early action remedies undertaken at sites of waste contamination for the purpose of managing, controlling, or reducing risk posed by environmental site contamination. Early action remedies and strategies are applicable to the management of other regulatory processes (for example, state underground storage tank (UST) programs are equally applicable) in addition to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)/National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contigency Plan (NCP) process. This guide identifies and describes a standard process, technical requirements, information needs, benefits, and strategy for early actions.  
1.2 This guide is applicable to both nonhazardous and hazardous sites of contamination as defined by CERCLA as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1986.  
1.3 To the extent that this guide may be used for hazardous materials operations, it does not address the applicability of regulatory limitations and local requirements.  
1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Test methods A and B are used to estimate the permanganate natural oxidant demand exerted by the soil or aquifer solids by determining the quantity of potassium permanganate that is consumed by naturally occurring species as a function of time. Test Method C is used to estimate the permanganate total oxidant demand exerted by soil, aquifer solids, chemical contaminants or any other reduced species by determining the quantity of potassium permanganate that is consumed by all components of the bulk aquifer as a function of time. Typically, the measurement of oxidant demand is used to screen potential sites for in situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) with permanganate (Test Methods A and C) and provide information to aid in the design of remediation systems (Test Methods B and C).  
5.2 While some oxidizable species react relatively quickly (that is, days to weeks), others react more slower (weeks to months). Consequently, the PNODt is expected to be some fraction of the PNODmax.  
5.3 For ISCO injection applications, the PNOD may overestimate the demand exerted due to mass transport related issues. For soil blending applications, the PNOD is a more accurate measure of the demand exerted due to better mass to oxidant contact.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/and so forth.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the estimation of the permanganate natural oxidant demand (PNOD) through the determination of the quantity of potassium permanganate (KMnO4) that organic matter and other naturally occurring oxidizable species present in soil or aquifer solids will consume under specified conditions as a function of time. Oxidizable species may include organic constituents and oxidizable inorganic ions, such as ferrous iron and sulfides. The following test methods are included:
Test Method A—48-hour Permanganate Natural Oxidant Demand
Test Method B—Permanganate Natural Oxidant Demand Kinetics  
Test Method C—Permanganate Total Oxidant Demand  
1.2 These test methods are limited by the reagents employed to a permanganate natural oxidant demand (PNOD) of 40 g KMnO4 per kg soil or aquifer solids after a period of 48 hours (Methods A and C) or two weeks (Method B).  
1.3 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to interpret the results of the data. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to interpret the results obtained and to determine the applicability of these results prior to use.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
3.1 The success of a sampling event is influenced by adequate planning and preparation. Use of this guide will help the groundwater sampler to methodically execute the planning and preparation.  
3.2 This guide should be used by a professional or technician that has training or experience in groundwater sampling.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers planning and preparing for a groundwater sampling event. It includes technical and administrative considerations and procedures. Example checklists are also provided as Appendices.  
1.2 This guide may not cover every consideration procedure, or both, that is necessary before all groundwater sampling projects. In karst or fractured rock terranes, it may be appropriate to collect groundwater samples from springs (see Guide D5717). This guide focuses on sampling of groundwater from monitoring wells; however, most of the guidance herein can apply to the sampling of springs as well.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Vapor intrusion testing has been performed traditionally using multiple canister samples or thermal desorption tube samples. These discontinuous measurements have been shown to be snapshots and provide averages of exposure. In many cases a higher temporal resolution is desirable to identify peaks of emissions due to specific occupancy or environmental changes. For these cases, a continuous real-time monitoring solution is desirable. These continuous monitoring setups can be either short-term or be part of a long-term monitoring plan as described in ASTM guide “Standard Guide for the development of LongTerm Monitoring Plans for Vapor Mitigation Systems” (E2600).  
5.2 The PTR-MS provides real-time measurement of multiple VOCs at ultra-trace levels, that is, in the µL/L (ppm) to less than pL/L (ppt) range. Its strengths lie with the ability to measure VOCs in real-time and continuously (that is, ~1 Hz or faster, using time-of-flight analyzers), and with limited sample pre-treatment, compared to a gas chromatograph (GC) system, which is commonly the method of choice to measure VOCs using a variety of detectors. In case of PTR-MS with quadrupole analyzers, the terms would be nearreal-time and semi-continuous. The high temporal resolution of the PTR-MS measurement in the range of second(s) is often desired when studying the atmospheric chemistry or source emissions that result in unpredictable, sudden, and short-term fluctuations. For a detailed description on the design and theory and practical aspects of operation for the different types of PTR-MS, please refer to Yuan et al. (2017)(1).  
5.3 For ambient air measurements, such as vapor intrusion (VI) related emission testing, the PTR-MS can be used in three different modes of operation: (1) in scanning mode to identify sources and VI entry points within buildings; (2) in variation identification mode, as a continuous monitoring instrument with seconds to minutes of temporal resolution covering a large number of V...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method describes a technique of quantifying the results from measuring various volatile organic compound contents using a chemical ionization mass spectrometer resulting in the production of positively charged target compound ions. Depending on the nature of production of so-called primary ions, the associated instruments having the capability to perform such analyses are either named Proton Transfer Reaction Mass Spectrometers (PTR-MS), Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometers (SIFT-MS) or, in the most generic term, Mid-pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometers (MPCI-MS). Within this standard, the term PTR-MS is used to represent any of these instrumentations.  
1.2 Either of the instrument types can be used with the two main mass analyzers on the market, that is, with either quadrupole (QMS) or time-of-flight (TOFMS) mass analyzer. This method relates only to the quantification portion of the analysis. Due to large differences in user interfaces and operating procedures for the instruments of the main instrument providers, the specifics on instrument operation are not described in this method.  
1.3 Details on the theoretical aspects concerning ion production and chemical reactions are included in this standard as far as required to understand the quantification aspects and practical operation of the instrument in the field of vapor intrusion analyses. Specifics on the operation and/or calibration of the instrument need to be identified by using the user’s manual of the individual instrument vendor. A comprehensive discussion on the technique including individual mass-line interferences and in-depth comparison with alternate methods are given in multiple publications, such as Yuan et al. (2017) (1) and Dunne et al. (2018) (2)2.  
1.4 Units—Values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. Reporting of test results in units othe...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Method Considerations—The objective of most groundwater sampling programs is to obtain samples that are similar in composition to that of the formation water near the well screen. The low-flow purging and sampling method uses the stabilization of indicator parameters to determine when the pump discharge is considered to represent a flow-weighted average of the formation water. Measurements of operational parameters are used to determine potential sampling bias (for example, artifactual turbidity and increased temperature) that may have been introduced by pumping operations and to ensure that the sample is representative of formation water. The low-flow purge rate minimizes lowering of the ambient groundwater level and thereby minimizes potential entrainment of blank-riser pipe (and potentially stagnant) water above or below the screen into the screened-zone of the well. This sampling method assumes that the well has been properly designed and constructed as described in Practices D5092/D5092M and D6725/D6725M, adequately developed as described in Guide D5521/D5521M, and has received proper well maintenance and rehabilitation as described in Guide D5978/D5978M (see Note 1).
Note 1: This Standard is not intended to replace or supersede any regulatory requirements, standard operating procedure (SOP), quality assurance project plan (QAPP), ground water sampling and analysis plan (GWSAP) or site-specific regulatory permit requirements. The procedures described in this Standard may be used in conjunction with regulatory requirements, SOPs, QAPPs, GWSAPs or permits where allowed by the authority with jurisdiction.  
5.2 Applicability—Low-flow purging and sampling may be used in a monitoring well that can be pumped at a constant low-flow rate without continuously increasing drawdown in the well (2). If a well cannot be purged without continuously increasing drawdown even at very low pumping rates (for example, 50 – 100 mL/min), the well should not be sampled using th...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes the method of low-flow purging and sampling used to collect groundwater samples from wells to assess groundwater quality.  
1.2 The purpose of this procedure is to collect groundwater samples that represent a flow-weighted average of solute and colloid concentrations transported through the formation near the well screen under ambient conditions. Samples collected using this method can be analyzed for groundwater contaminants and/or naturally occurring analytes.  
1.3 This practice is generally not suitable for use in wells with very low-yields and cannot be conducted using grab sampling or inertial lift devices. This practice is not suitable for use in wells with non-aqueous phase liquids.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are approximate mathematical conversions to inch-pound units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “standard” in the title means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standar...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Direct observation of the subsurface by the collection of soil and rock samples is an essential part of investigation for geotechnical and environmental purposes. This guide provides information on the major types of soil and rock sampling devices to assist in selection of devices that are suitable for known site geologic conditions, and provide samples that meet project objectives. This guide should not be used as a substitute for consulting with professional experience in sampling soil or rock in similar formations before determining the best method and type of sampling.  
4.2 This guide should be used in conjunction with Guide D6286 on drilling methods and sampling equipment, and diamond drilling Guide D2113. Drilling and sampler specific practices and guides listed throughout this guide are used as part of developing a detailed site investigation and sampling plan. The sampling plan should start with development of a site conceptual model and phased investigations to locate sampling sites (D420, D6286). The selection of sampling equipment and sampling devices goes hand-in-hand. In some cases, soil sample requirements may influence choice of drilling method, or conversely, types of available sampling equipment may influence choice of sampling devices.  
4.3 Samples should be handled in accordance with Practice D4220/D4220M, for preserving and transporting soil samples, Practice D5079 for preserving and transporting rock core samples for geotechnical purposes. For environmental work sample handling procedures should be in accordance with Practice D6640 for collection and handling of soils obtained in core barrel samplers for environmental investigations, Practice D3694 for preparation of sample containers and for preservation of organic constituents, and Practice D5088 for decontamination of field equipment used at waste sites.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers guidance for the selection of soil and rock sampling devices used for the purpose of characterizing in situ physical and hydraulic properties, chemical characteristics, subsurface lithology, stratigraphy and structure, and hydrogeologic units in geotechnical and environmental investigations.  
1.2 This guide should be used in conjunction with referenced ASTM Guides D420 and D5730, and individual practices for sampling devices referenced in 2.1. Soil and rock samplers are most often used in drilled/pushed boreholes using various drilling methods/technologies in Guide D6286 and it addresses ability to use these samplers.  
1.3 Refer to Practice D6640 and Guide D4547 for handling of samples for environmental investigations. Practices D4220/D4220M and D5079 are used for preserving and transporting soil and rock samples.  
1.4 This guide does not address selection of sampling devices for hand-held soil sampling equipment (Guide D4700) and soil sample collection with solid-stem augering devices (Practice D1452/D1452M), or collection of grab samples or hand-carved block samples (D7015/D7015M) from accessible excavations. Refer to X1.2 for additional guidance on use of soil and rock sampling devices for both environmental and geotechnical applications.  
1.5 This guide does not address devices for collecting cores from submerged sediments or other sampling devices for solid wastes. Refer to Guides D4823 and D6232 for these materials.  
1.6 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.  
1.7 This guide offers an organized collection of information or series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document canno...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 There are two primary types of vapor mitigation systems: Active and Passive (Table 1). Active vapor mitigation systems include: Sub-Slab Depressurization (SSD), Sub-Membrane Depressurization (SMD), Sub-Membrane Pressurization, Block-Wall Depressurization, Drain-tile Depressurization, Building Pressurization, Heat-Exchange Systems, and Indoor Air Treatment. Passive vapor mitigation systems include: Passive Venting, Floor Sealants, Vapor Barriers, and Increased Ventilation. Vapor mitigation systems may also consist of a combination of active and passive technologies.  
5.2 Development and implementation of a LTM Plan is important for ensuring the long-term protectiveness of the mitigation systems.  
5.3 The approach presented in this guide is a practical and streamlined process for establishing long-term monitoring requirements, monitoring time frames, and factors needed to determine when the use of a vapor mitigation system is no longer needed.  
5.4 This guide is intended to be used by environmental professionals including: consultants, building managers, local or regional governing or regulatory agencies, that are installing vapor mitigation systems, conducting monitoring of the vapor barriers, or developing LTM Plans for vapor mitigation systems. Vapor mitigation system installation and LTM activities should only be carried out by environmental professionals who are trained in the proper application of vapor mitigation systems and experienced in the monitoring described in this guide, as applicable.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide presents factors to consider when developing Long-Term Monitoring (LTM) Plans for monitoring the performance of both active and passive vapor mitigation systems in buildings. This guide will also assist in developing appropriate performance standards to make sure that vapor mitigation systems remain protective of human health. Active and passive vapor mitigation systems have been used for a number of years on contaminated properties where residual volatile contaminants remain in the ground. This guide discusses a variety of vapor mitigations systems; however, its focus is on the development of long-term monitoring plans for vapor mitigation systems that are designed to remain in place for multiple years.  
1.2 A LTM Plan provides clear performance goals for a vapor mitigation system which help to reduce potential confusion and ineffective project management. The LTM Plan also defines performance monitoring time frames to efficiently test the vapor mitigation systems’ effectiveness without unnecessary and costly over-testing. This will also promote consistent monitoring. Vapor mitigation systems are often installed without adequate consideration of the long-term monitoring requirements necessary to make sure that they remain protective of human health for as long as the system remains in place. This guidance addresses the requirements of the LTM Plan to monitor a vapor mitigation system’s continued effectiveness. Installation verification that the vapor mitigation system was installed correctly is typically addressed in the Remedial Design stage of a contaminated Property Management and is not covered in this document.  
1.3 LTM Plan limitations, constraints and potential sources of error are discussed in this standard. This guide does not endorse a mitigation system vendor or testing of vapor mitigation systems. However, this guide does provide a reference for the common procedures for testing vapor miti...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Direct-push groundwater sampling and profiling are economical methods for obtaining discrete interval groundwater quality samples in many soils and unconsolidated formations without the expense of permanent monitoring well installation (1-10).4 Many of these devices can be used to profile groundwater quality or contamination and/or hydraulic conductivity with depth by performing repetitive sampling and testing events. DP groundwater sampling is often used in expedited site characterization (Practice D6235) and as a means to accomplish high resolution site characterization (HRSC) (11, 12). The formation to be sampled should be sufficiently permeable to allow filling of the sampler in a relatively short time. The zone to be sampled and/or slug tested can be isolated by matching sampler screen length to obtain discrete samples of thin saturated, permeable layers. Use of these sampling and hydraulic testing techniques will result in more detailed characterization of sites containing multiple aquifers. The field conditions, sampler design and data quality objectives should be reviewed to determine if development (Guide D5521/D5521M) of the screened formation is appropriate. The samplers do not have a filter pack designed to retain fines like conventional wells, but only a slotted screen or wire-mesh covered ports. So, obtaining low turbidity samples may be difficult or even impossible in formations with a significant proportion of fine-grained materials. With most systems turbidity will always be high so consult Guide D6564/D6564M if field filtration of samples is required. Discrete water sampling, combined with knowledge of location and thickness of target aquifers, may better define conditions in thin multiple aquifers than monitoring wells with long screened intervals that can intersect and allow for intercommunication of multiple aquifers (4, 6, 11-15). DP sampling performed without knowledge of the location and thickness of target aquifers can result in sampling...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers a review of methods for sampling groundwater at discrete points or in increments by insertion of groundwater sampling devices using Direct Push Methods (D6286/D6286M, see 3.3.2). By directly pushing the sampler, the soil is displaced and helps to form an annular seal above the sampling zone. Direct-push water sampling can be one time, or multiple sampling events. Knowledge of site specific geology and hydrogeologic conditions is necessary to successfully obtain groundwater samples with these devices.  
1.2 Direct-push methods of water sampling are used for groundwater quality and geohydrologic studies. Water quality and permeability may vary at different depths below the surface depending on geohydrologic conditions. Incremental sampling or sampling at discrete depths is used to determine the distribution of contaminants and to more completely characterize geohydrologic environments. These explorations are frequently advised in characterization of hazardous and toxic waste sites and for geohydrologic studies.  
1.3 This guide covers several types of groundwater samplers; sealed screen samplers, profiling samplers, dual tube sampling systems, and simple exposed screen samplers. In general, sealed screen samplers driven to discrete depth provide the highest quality water samples. Profiling samplers using an exposed screen(s) which are purged between sampling events allow for more rapid sample collection at multiple depths. Simple exposed screen samplers driven to a test zone with no purging prior to sampling may result in more questionable water quality if exposed to upper contaminated zones, and in that case, would be considered screening devices.  
1.4 Methods for obtaining groundwater samples for water quality analysis and detection of contaminants are presented. These methods include use of related standards such as; selection of purging and sampling devices (Guide D6452 and D6634/D6634M), samp...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide is for the use of disposable handheld soil core samplers in collecting and storing approximately 5 or 25 g soil samples for volatile organic analysis in a manner that reduces loss of contaminants due to volatilization or biodegradation. In general, an initial soil core sample is collected (see Guides D6169/D6169M and D6282/D6282M) and the disposable handheld soil core sampler is then used to collect the 5 or 25 g soil sample from the initial soil core sample. The disposable handheld soil core sampler can also serve as a sample storage chamber.  
5.2 The physical integrity of the soil sample is maintained during sample collection, storage, and transfer in the laboratory for analysis or preservation.  
5.3 During sample collection, storage, and transfer, there is very limited exposure of the sample to the atmosphere.  
5.4 Laboratory subsampling is not required for samples collected following this guide. The sample is expelled directly from the coring body/storage chamber into the appropriate container for analysis, or preservation, at the analytical laboratory without disrupting the integrity of the sample. Subsampling from the disposable handheld soil core sampler should not be performed to obtain smaller sample sizes for analysis.  
5.5 This guide specifies sample storage in the disposable handheld soil core sampler at 4 ± 2°C for up to 48 h.  
5.6 This guide does not use methanol preservation or other chemical preservatives in the field. As a result, there are no problems associated with flammability hazards, shipping restrictions, or dilution of samples containing low volatile concentrations due to solvents being added to samples in the field.  
5.7 The disposable handheld soil core samplers are single-use devices. They should not be cleaned or reused.  
5.8 This disposable handheld soil core samplers cannot be used for collecting cemented material, consolidated material, or material having fragments wider than the mouth of the device or coa...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide is intended for application to soils that may contain volatile organic compounds.  
1.2 This guide provides a general procedure and considerations associated with using a disposable handheld soil core sampler to collect and temporarily store a soil sample for volatile organic analysis.  
1.3 In general, an initial soil sample is collected (see Guides D6169/D6169M and D6282/D6282M) and the disposable handheld soil core sampler is then used to collect the 5 or 25 g soil sample from the initial soil core sample. The disposable handheld soil core sampler can also serve as a sample storage chamber. It is recommended that this standard be used in conjunction with Guides D4547, D4687, D6169/D6169M, D6232, D6282/D6282M, D6418, and D6640, as appropriate, which provide information on the collection of the initial soil core sample.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.5 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.6 This standard doe...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 Well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 Well is of infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The nonleaky aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and aerially extensive. A nonleaky aquifer receives insignificant contribution of water from confining beds.  
5.1.4 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.  
5.1.5 The geometry of the assumed aquifer and well conditions are shown in Fig. 1.    
5.2.3 Application of Theis Method to Unconfined Aquifers:  
5.2.3.1 Although the assumptions are applicable to artesian or confined conditions, the Theis solution may be applied to unconfined aquifers if drawdown is small compared with the saturated thickness of the aquifer or if the drawdown is corrected for reduction in thickness of the aquifer, and the effects of delayed gravity yield are small.
5.2.3.2 Reduction in Aquifer Thickness—In an unconfined aquifer dewatering occurs when the water levels decline in the vicinity of a pumping well. Corrections in drawdown need to be made when the drawdown is a significant fraction of the aquifer thickness as shown by Jacob (5). The drawdown, s, needs to be replaced by s′, the drawdown that would occur in an equivalent confined aquifer, where:
5.2.3.3 Gravity Yield Effects—In unconfined aquifers, delayed gravity yield effects may invalidate measurements of drawdown during the early part of the test for application to the Theis method. Effects of delayed gravity yield are negligible in partially penetrating observation wells at and beyond a distance, r, from the control well, where:
After the time, t, as given in Eq 9 from Neuman (6).
     where:
  Sy  =  the specific yield. For fully penetrating observation wells, the effects of delayed yield are negligible at the distance, r, in Eq 8 after one tenth of the time given in the Eq 9.    
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the co...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity and storage coefficient of a nonleaky confined aquifer. It is used to analyze data on water-level response collected during radial flow to or from a well of constant discharge or injection.  
1.2 This analytical procedure, along with others, is used in conjunction with the field procedure given in Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The limitations of this practice for determination of hydraulic properties of aquifers are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumptions of this practice (see 5.1).  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design.  
1.5 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of the practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without the consideration of a project’s many ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 The control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 The control well is of infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive.
Note 1: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.  
5.1.4 The aquifer remains saturated (that is, water level does not decline below the top of the aquifer).  
5.1.5 The aquifer is overlain or underlain, or both, everywhere by confining beds individually having uniform hydraulic conductivities, specific storages, and thicknesses. The confining beds are bounded on the distal sides by one of the cases shown in Fig. 1.  
5.1.6 Flow in the aquifer is two-dimensional and radial in the horizontal plane.  
5.2 The geometry of the well and aquifer system is shown in Fig. 1.  
5.3 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.3.1 Paragraph 5.1.1 indicates that the discharge from the control well is at a constant rate. Paragraph 8.1 of Test Method D4050 discusses the variation from a strictly constant rate that is acceptable. A continuous trend in the change of the discharge rate could result in misinterpretation of the water-level change data unless taken into consideration.
Note 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.  
5.3.2 The leaky confining bed problem considered by the modified Hantush method requires that the control well has an infinite...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity and storage coefficient of a confined aquifer taking into consideration the change in storage of water in overlying or underlying confining beds, or both. This practice is used to analyze water-level or head data collected from one or more observation wells or piezometers during the pumping of water from a control well at a constant rate. With appropriate changes in sign, this practice also can be used to analyze the effects of injecting water into a control well at a constant rate.  
1.2 This analytical procedure is used in conjunction with Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The valid use of the modified Hantush method (1)2 is limited to the determination of hydraulic properties for aquifers in hydrogeologic settings with reasonable correspondence to the assumptions of the Hantush-Jacob method (Practice D6029/D6029M) with the exception that in this case the gain or loss of water in storage in the confining beds is taken into consideration (see 5.1). All possible combinations of impermeable beds and source beds (for example, beds in which the head remains uniform) are considered on the distal side of the leaky beds that confine the aquifer of interest (see Fig. 1).
FIG. 1 Cross Sections Through Discharging Wells in Leaky Aquifers with Storage of Water in the Confining Beds, Illustrating Three Different Cases of Boundary Conditions (from Reed (2) )  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in the standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies,...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 The well discharges at a constant rate.  
5.1.2 Well is of infinitesimal diameter and is open through the full thickness of the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The nonleaky confined aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive except where limited by linear boundaries.  
5.1.4 Discharge from the well is derived initially from storage in the aquifer; later, movement of water may be induced from a constant-head boundary into the aquifer.  
5.1.5 The geometry of the assumed aquifer and well are shown in Fig. 1 or Fig. 2.  
5.1.6 Boundaries are vertical planes, infinite in length that fully penetrate the aquifer. No water is yielded to the aquifer by impermeable boundaries, whereas recharging boundaries are in perfect hydraulic connection with the aquifer.  
5.1.7 Observation wells represent the head in the aquifer; that is, the effects of wellbore storage in the observation wells are negligible.  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.2.1 Implicit in the assumptions are the conditions of a fully-penetrating control well and observation wells of infinitesimal diameter in a confined aquifer. Under certain conditions, aquifer tests can be successfully analyzed when the control well is open to only part of the aquifer or contains a significant volume of water or when the test is conducted in an unconfined aquifer. These conditions are discussed in more detail in Practice D4105/D4105M.  
5.2.2 In cases in which this practice is used to locate an unknown boundary, a minimum of three observation wells is needed. If only two observation wells are available, two possible locations of the boundary are defined, and if only one observation well is used, a circle describing all possible locations of the image well is defined.  
5.2.3 The effects of a constant-head boundary are often indistinguishable from the effects of a leaky, confined aquifer. Therefore, care must be taken to ensure that a correct conceptual model of the system has been created ...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity, storage coefficient, and possible location of boundaries for a confined aquifer with a linear boundary. This practice is used to analyze water-level or head data from one or more observation wells or piezometers during the pumping of water from a control well at a constant rate. This practice also applies to flowing artesian wells discharging at a constant rate. With appropriate changes in sign, this practice also can be used to analyze the effects of injecting water into a control well at a constant rate.  
1.2 The analytical procedure in this practice is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The valid use of this practice is limited to determination of transmissivities and storage coefficients for aquifers in hydrogeologic settings with reasonable correspondence to the assumptions of the Theis nonequilibrium method (see Practice D4106) (see 5.1), except that the aquifer is limited in areal extent by a linear boundary that fully penetrates the aquifer. The boundary is assumed to be either a constant-head boundary (equivalent to a stream or lake that hydraulically fully penetrates the aquifer) or a no-flow (impermeable) boundary (equivalent to a contact with a significantly less permeable rock unit). The Theis nonequilibrium method is described in Practices D4105/D4105M and D4106.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significa...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions of Solution of Cooper et al (1):  
5.1.1 The head change in the control well is instantaneous at time t  = 0.  
5.1.2 Well is of finite diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer.  
5.1.3 Flow in the nonleaky aquifer is radial.
Note 2: The exact conservation equation of Richards (5)with the volumetric water content can be simplified to take the form used in the solution of (1)with the storage coefficient, which implies several assumptions including that of constant total stresses (6).  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.2.1 The mathematical equations applied ignore inertial effects and assume the water level returns the static level in an approximate exponential manner. The geometric configuration of the well and aquifer are shown in Fig. 1.
FIG. 1 Cross Section Through a Well in Which a Slug of Water is Suddenly Injected  
5.2.2 Assumptions are applicable to artesian or confined conditions and fully penetrating wells. However, this practice is commonly applied to partially penetrating wells and in unconfined aquifers where it may provide estimates of hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer interval adjacent to the open interval of the well if the horizontal hydraulic conductivity is significantly greater than the vertical hydraulic conductivity.
Note 3: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.  
5.2.3 As pointed out by Cooper et al (1) the determination of storage coefficient by this practice has questionable reliability because of the similar shape of the curves, whereas, the determination of transmissivity is not as sensitive to choosing the correct curve. However, the curve selected should not imply a storage coefficient unrealistically large or small.
Note 4: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities us...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of transmissivity from the measurement of force-free (overdamped) response of a well-aquifer system to a sudden change of water level in a well. Force-free response of water level in a well to a sudden change in water level is characterized by recovery to initial water level in an approximate exponential manner with negligible inertial effects.  
1.2 The analytical procedure in this practice is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Test Method D4044/D4044M for collection of test data.  
1.3 Limitations—Slug tests are considered to provide an estimate of transmissivity. Although the assumptions of this practice prescribe a fully penetrating well (a well open through the full thickness of the aquifer), the slug test is commonly conducted using a partially penetrating well. Such a practice may be acceptable for application under conditions in which the aquifer is stratified and horizontal hydraulic conductivity is much greater than vertical hydraulic conductivity. In such a case the test would be considered to be representative of the average hydraulic conductivity of the portion of the aquifer adjacent to the open interval of the well.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in the standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this practice to consider significant digits use...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice allows the user to compute the true hydraulic efficiency of a pumped well in a confined aquifer from a constant rate pumping field test. The procedures described constitute the only valid method of determining well efficiency. Some practitioners have confused well efficiency with percentage of head loss associated with laminar flow, a parameter commonly determined from a step-drawdown test. Well efficiency, however, cannot be determined from a step-drawdown test but only can be determined from a constant rate test.  
5.2 Assumptions:  
5.2.1 Control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.2.2 Control well is of infinitesimal diameter.  
5.2.3 Data are obtained from the control well and, if available, a number of observation wells.  
5.2.4 The aquifer is confined, homogeneous, and extensive. The aquifer may be anisotropic, and if so, the directions of maximum and minimum hydraulic conductivity are horizontal and vertical, respectively.  
5.2.5 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.  
5.3 Calculation Requirements—For the special case of partially penetrating wells, application of this practice may be computationally intensive. The function fs shown in Eq 6 should be evaluated using arbitrary input parameters. It is not practical to use existing, somewhat limited, tables of values for fs and, because this equation is rather formidable, it may not be tractable by hand. Because of this, it is assumed the practitioner using this practice will have available a computerized procedure for evaluating the function fs. This can be accomplished using commercially available mathematical software including some spreadsheet applications. If calculating fs is not practical, it is recommended to substitute the Kozeny equation for the Hantush equation as previously described.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability o...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes an analytical procedure for determining the hydraulic efficiency of a production well in a confined aquifer. It involves comparing the actual drawdown in the well to the theoretical minimum drawdown achievable and is based upon data and aquifer coefficients obtained from a constant rate pumping test.  
1.2 This analytical practice is used in conjunction with the field procedure, Test Method D4050.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard, except as noted below. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units, which are provided for information only and are not considered standard. The reporting of results in units other than inch-pound shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.3.1 The gravitational system of inch-pound units is used when dealing with inch-pound units. In this system, the pound (lbf) represents a unit of force (weight), while the unit for mass is slugs.  
1.4 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determination of well efficiency are related primarily to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumption of this practice.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and round established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported date to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 Control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 Control well is of infinitesimal diameter and partially penetrates the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The nonleaky artesian aquifer is homogeneous, and aerially extensive. The aquifer may also be anisotropic and, if so, the directions of maximum and minimum hydraulic conductivity are horizontal and vertical, respectively. The methods may be used to analyze tests on unconfined aquifers under conditions described in a following section.
Note 1: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.  
5.1.4 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.  
5.1.5 The geometry of the assumed aquifer and well conditions are shown in Fig. 2.  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions—The vertical flow components in the aquifer are induced by a control well that partially penetrates the aquifer, that is, a well that is not open to the aquifer through its full thickness. The effects of vertical flow components are measured in piezometers near the control well, that is, within a distance, r, in which vertical flow components are significant, that is:
5.3 Application of Method to Unconfined Aquifers:  
5.3.1 Although the assumptions are applicable to artesian or confined conditions, Weeks (1) has pointed out that the solution may be applied to unconfined aquifers if drawdown is small compared with the saturated thickness of the aquifer or if the drawdown is corrected for reduction in thickness of the aquifer, and the effects of delayed gravity response are small. The effects of gravity response become negligible after a time as given, for piezometers near the water table, by the equation:
for values of ar/b  
for greater values of ar/b.  
5.3.2 Drawdown in an unconfined aquifer is also affected by curvature of the water table or free surface near the control well, and b...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical solution for determining the horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity of an aquifer by analysis of the response of water levels in the aquifer to the discharge from a well that partially penetrates the aquifer. This standard uses data derived from Test Method D4050.  
1.2 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determination of the horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity of aquifers are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumption of this practice.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design  
1.5 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method provides design information for construction of an orifice weir. It also describes setup, operation, inspection, calculation of discharge, and reporting. The accuracy of a circular weir decreases at low flows. The use of a circular orifice weir requires a constant flow velocity over the period of measurement. The results may be affected by the piezometers distance from the orifice plate. This equipment may not be appropriate for measuring flows on small wells, or wells with limited recharge.  
5.2 Aquifer testing has been conducted for the purposes of production and pressure relief well design and water resource assessment. Production wells are used for public and industrial water supplies, hydraulic controls, and groundwater capture. Pressure relief wells are for hydraulic controls. Test wells are for the purpose of water resource assessment.  
5.3 Discharge must also be known for certain methods to evaluate well and pump performance.
Note 1: Practice D3740 provides evaluation factors for the activities in this standard. The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers construction and operation of a circular orifice weir for measuring the discharge from a well. This test method is a part of a series of standards prepared on the in situ determination of hydraulic properties of aquifer systems by single- or multiple-well tests. Selection of a well discharge measurement test method is described in Guide D5737M.  
1.2 The discharge rate determined by this test method is commonly used for a number of aquifer test methods and to provide information for the evaluation of well and pump performance.  
1.3 Limitations—This test method is limited to the description of a method common to hydraulic engineering for the purpose of groundwater discharge measurement in temporary or test conditions.  
1.4 Much of the information presented in this test method is based on work performed by the Civil Engineering Department of Purdue University during the late 1940s. The essentials of that work have been presented in a pamphlet prepared by Layne-Bowler, Inc.2 and updated by Layne Western Company, Inc.3  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall be conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this document to consider significant digits sused analysis methods for engineering design.  
1.6 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of th...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions of Solution:  
5.1.1 Drawdown (or mounding) of the water table around the well is negligible.  
5.1.2 Flow above the water table can be ignored.  
5.1.3 Head losses as the water enters or leaves the well are negligible.  
5.1.4 The aquifer is homogeneous and isotropic.
Note 6: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.2.1 The mathematical equations applied ignore inertial effects and assume that the water level returns to the static level in an approximate exponential manner.  
5.2.2 The geometric configuration of the well and aquifer are shown in Fig. 1, that is after Fig. 1 of Bouwer and Rice (1).  
Note 7: Short term refers to the duration of the slug test.
Note 8: The function of wells in any unconfined setting in a fractured terrain might make the determination of k problematic because the wells might only intersect tributary or subsidiary channels or conduits. The problems determining the k of a channel or conduit notwithstanding, the partial penetration of tributary channels may make a determination of a meaningful number difficult. If plots of k in carbonates and other fractured settings are made and compared, they may show no indication that there are conduits or channels present, except when with the lowest probability one maybe intersected by a borehole and can be verified, such problems are described by Smart (1999) (6). Additional guidance can be found in Guide D5717.
Note 9: The comparison of data from various methods on variable head permeability tests has been documented. Variation in instrumentation, assumptions and calculational methods will lead to differing results (7). Users should be familiar with the assumptions, instrumentation and calculational aspects of the test when evaluating the results (8).
Note 10: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependen...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of hydraulic conductivity from the measurement of inertial force free (overdamped) response of a well-aquifer system to a sudden change in water level in a well. Inertial force free response of the water level in a well to a sudden change in water level is characterized by recovery to initial water level in an approximate exponential manner with negligible inertial effects.  
1.2 The analytical procedure in this practice is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Test Method D4044/D4044M for collection of test data.  
1.3 Limitations—Slug tests are considered to provide an estimate of hydraulic conductivity. The determination of storage coefficient is not practicable with this practice. Because the volume of aquifer material tested is small, the values obtained are representative of materials very near the open portion of the control well.  
Note 1: Slug tests are usually considered to provide estimates of the lower limit of the actual hydraulic conductivity of an aquifer because the test results are so heavily influenced by well efficiency and borehole skin effects near the open portion of the well. The portion of the aquifer that is tested by the slug test is limited to an area near the open portion of the well where the aquifer materials may have been altered during well installation, and therefore may significantly impact the test results. In some cases, the data may be misinterpreted and result in a higher estimate of hydraulic conductivity. This is due to the reliance on early time data that is reflective of the hydraulic conductivity of the filter pack surrounding the well. This effect was discussed by Bouwer (1).2 In addition, because of the reliance on early time data, in aquifers with medium to high hydraulic conductivity, the early time portion of the curve that is useful for this data analyses is too short (for example,  
1.4 Units—The values stated in S...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice is one of several available for determining vertical anisotropy ratio. Among other available methods are Weeks ((5); see Practice D5473/D5473M), that relies on distance-drawdown data, and Way and McKee (6), that utilizes time-drawdown data. An important restriction of the Weeks distance-drawdown method is that the observation wells need to have identical construction (screened intervals) and two or more of the observation wells need to be located at a distance from the pumped well beyond the effects of partial penetration. The procedure described in this practice general distance-drawdown method, in that it works in theory for most observation well configurations incorporating three or more wells, provided some of the wells are within the zone where flow is affected by partial penetration.  
5.2 Assumptions:  
5.2.1 Control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.2.2 Control well is of infinitesimal diameter and partially penetrates the aquifer.  
5.2.3 Data are obtained from a number of partially penetrating observation wells, some screened at elevations similar to that in the pumped well and some screened at different elevations.  
5.2.4 The aquifer is confined, homogeneous and areally extensive. The aquifer may be anisotropic, and, if so, the directions of maximum and minimum hydraulic conductivity are horizontal and vertical, respectively.  
5.2.5 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.  
5.3 Calculation Requirements—Application of this method is computationally intensive. The function, fs, shown in (Eq 4) should be evaluated numerous times using arbitrary input parameters. It is not practical to use existing, somewhat limited, tables of values for fs and, because this equation is rather formidable, it may not be easily tractable by hand. Because of this, it is assumed the practitioner using this will have available a computerized procedure for evaluating the function fs. This can be accomplished u...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity, storage coefficient, and ratio of vertical to horizontal hydraulic conductivity of a confined aquifer using observation well drawdown measurements from a constant-rate pumping test. This practice uses data from a minimum of four partially penetrating, recommended to be positioned observation wells around a partially penetrating control well.  
1.2 The analytical procedure is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determination of the horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivity of aquifers are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumption of this practice.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI units given in parentheses are mathematical conversions, which are provided for information purposes only and are not considered standard. The reporting of results in units other than inch-pound shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.6 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objective; and it is common practice to increase or reduce the significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis method or engineeri...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 The control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 The control well is of infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive.
Note 2: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.  
5.1.4 The aquifer remains saturated (that is, water level does not decline below the top of the aquifer).  
5.1.5 The aquifer is overlain, or underlain, everywhere by a confining bed having a uniform hydraulic conductivity and thickness. It is assumed that there is no change of water storage in this confining bed and that the hydraulic gradient across this bed changes instantaneously with a change in head in the aquifer. This confining bed is bounded on the distal side by a uniform head source where the head does not change with time.  
5.1.6 The other confining bed is impermeable.  
5.1.7 Leakage into the aquifer is vertical and proportional to the drawdown, and flow in the aquifer is strictly horizontal.  
5.1.8 Flow in the aquifer is two-dimensional and radial in the horizontal plane.  
5.2 The geometry of the well and aquifer system is shown in Fig. 1.  
5.3 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.3.1 Paragraph 5.1.1 indicates that the discharge from the control well is at a constant rate. Section 8.1 of Test Method D4050 discusses the variation from a strictly constant rate that is acceptable. A continuous trend in the change of the discharge rate could result in misinterpretation of the water-level change data unless taken into consideration.  
5.3.2 The leaky confining bed problem considered by the Hantush-Jacob solution requires that the control well has an infinitesimal diameter and has no storage. Abdul Khader and Ramadurgaiah (5) developed graphs of a solution for the drawdowns in a large-diameter control well discharging at a constant rate from an aquifer confined...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity and storage coefficient of a confined aquifer and the leakance value of an overlying or underlying confining bed for the case where there is negligible change of water in storage in a confining bed. This practice is used to analyze water-level or head data collected from one or more observation wells or piezometers during the pumping of water from a control well at a constant rate. With appropriate changes in sign, this practice also can be used to analyze the effects of injecting water into a control well at a constant rate.  
1.2 This analytical procedure is used in conjunction with Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The valid use of the Hantush-Jacob method is limited to the determination of hydraulic properties for aquifers in hydrogeologic settings with reasonable correspondence to the assumptions of the Theis nonequilibrium method (Practice D4106) with the exception that in this case the aquifer is overlain, or underlain, everywhere by a confining bed having a uniform hydraulic conductivity and thickness, and in which the gain or loss of water in storage is assumed to be negligible, and that bed, in turn, is bounded on the distal side by a zone in which the head remains constant. The hydraulic conductivity of the other bed confining the aquifer is so small that it is assumed to be impermeable (see Fig. 1).
FIG. 1 Cross Section Through a Discharging Well in a Leaky Aquifer (from Reed (1)3). The Confining and Impermeable Bed Locations Can Be Interchanged  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
6.1 The assumptions of the physical system are given as follows:  
6.1.1 The aquifer is of uniform thickness, with impermeable upper and lower confining boundaries.  
6.1.2 The aquifer is of constant homogeneous porosity and matrix compressibility and constant homogeneous and isotropic hydraulic conductivity.  
6.1.3 The origin of the cylindrical coordinate system is taken to be on the well-bore axis at the top of the aquifer.  
6.1.4 The aquifer is fully screened.  
6.1.5 The well is 100 % efficient, that is, the skin factor, f, and dimensionless skin factor, σ, are zero.  
6.2 The assumptions made in defining the momentum balance are as follows:  
6.2.1 The average water velocity in the well is approximately constant over the well-bore section.  
6.2.2 Frictional head losses from flow in the well are negligible.  
6.2.3 Flow through the well screen is uniformly distributed over the entire aquifer thickness.  
6.2.4 Change in momentum from the water velocity changing from radial flow through the screen to vertical flow in the well are negligible.  
Note 1: Slug and pumping tests implicitly assume a porous medium. Fractured rock and carbonate settings may not provide meaningful data and information.
Note 2: The function of wells in any unconfined setting in a fractured terrain might make the determination of k problematic because the wells might only intersect tributary or subsidiary channels or conduits. The problems determining the k of a channel or conduit notwithstanding, the partial penetration of tributary channels may make a determination of a meaningful number difficult. If plots of k in carbonates and other fractured settings are made and compared, they may show no indication that there are conduits or channels present, except when with the lowest probability one maybe intersected by a borehole and can be verified, such problems are described by (5) Smart (1999). Additional guidance can be found in Guide D5717.
Note 3: The quality of the resu...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers determination of transmissivity from the measurement of water-level response to a sudden change of water level in a well-aquifer system characterized as being critically damped or in the transition range from underdamped to overdamped. Underdamped response is characterized by oscillatory changes in water level; overdamped response is characterized by return of the water level to the initial static level in an approximately exponential manner. Overdamped response is covered in Guide D4043; underdamped response is covered in Practice D5785/D5785M, Guide D4043.  
1.2 The analytical procedure in this practice is used in conjunction with Guide D4043 and the field procedure in Test Method D4044/D4044M for collection of test data.  
1.3 Limitations—Slug tests are considered to provide an estimate of the transmissivity of an aquifer near the well screen. The method is applicable for systems in which the damping parameter, ζ, is within the range from 0.2 through 5.0. The assumptions of the method prescribe a fully penetrating well (a well open through the full thickness of the aquifer) in a confined, nonleaky aquifer.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.  
1.5 Un...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions of the Theis (1) equation affect specific capacity and transmissivity estimated from specific capacity. These assumptions are given below:  
5.1.1 Aquifer is homogeneous and isotropic.  
5.1.2 Aquifer is horizontal, of uniform thickness, and infinite in areal extent.  
5.1.3 Aquifer is confined by impermeable strata on its upper and lower boundaries.  
5.1.4 Density gradient in the flowing fluid must be negligible and the viscous resistance to flow must obey Darcy's Law.  
5.1.5 Control well penetrates and receives water equally from the entire thickness of the aquifer.  
5.1.6 Control well has an infinitesimal diameter.  
5.1.7 Control well discharges at a constant rate.  
5.1.8 Control well operates at 100 percent efficiency.  
5.1.9 Aquifer remains saturated throughout the duration of pumping.  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions and Limitations of Method.  
5.2.1 The simplifying assumptions necessary for solution of the Theis equation and application of the method are never fully met in a field situation. The satisfactory use of the method may depend upon the application of one or more empirical correction factors being applied to the field data.  
5.2.2 Generally the values of transmissivity derived from specific capacity vary from those values determined from aquifer tests utilizing observation wells. These differences may reflect 1) that specific-capacity represents the response of a small part of the aquifer near the well and may be greatly influenced by conditions near the well such as a gravel pack or graded material resulting from well development, and 2) effects of well efficiency and partial penetration.  
5.2.3 The values of transmissivity estimated from specific capacity data are considered less accurate than values obtained from analysis of drawdowns that are observed some distance from the pumped well.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this practice is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a procedure for conducting a specific capacity test, computing the specific capacity of a control well, and estimating the transmissivity in the vicinity of the control well. Specific capacity is the well yield per unit drawdown at an identified time after pumping started.  
1.2 This practice is used in conjunction with Test Method D4050 for conducting withdrawal and injection well tests.  
1.3 The method of determining transmissivity from specific capacity is a variation of the nonequilibrium method of Theis  (1)2 for determining transmissivity and storage coefficient of an aquifer. The Theis nonequilibrium method is given in Practice D4106.  
1.4 Limitations—The limitations of the technique for determining transmissivity are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumptions of the Theis method.  
1.5 The scope of this practice is limited by the capabilities of the apparatus.  
1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.6.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded and calculated in this practice are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that should generally be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this practice to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.  
1.7 Units—The values stated in SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions—Leaky Aquifer:  
5.1.1 Drawdown (sW) in the control well is constant,  
5.1.2 Well is infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates aquifer,  
5.1.3 The aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive, and  
5.1.4 The control well is 100 % efficient.  
5.2 Assumptions—Nonleaky Aquifer:  
5.2.1 Drawdown (sW) in the control well is constant,  
5.2.2 Well is infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates aquifer,  
5.2.3 The aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive,  
5.2.4 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the nonleaky aquifer, and  
5.2.5 The control well is 100 % efficient.  
5.3 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.3.1 The assumptions are applicable to confined aquifers and fully penetrating control wells. However, this practice may be applied to partially penetrating wells where the method may provide an estimate of hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer adjacent to the open interval of the well if the horizontal hydraulic conductivity is significantly greater than the vertical hydraulic conductivity.  
5.3.2 Values obtained for storage coefficient are less reliable than the values calculated for transmissivity. Storage coefficient values calculated from control well data are not reliable.
Note 7: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical solution for determining transmissivity and storage coefficient of a leaky or nonleaky confined aquifer. It is used to analyze data on the flow rate from a control well while a constant head is maintained in the well.  
1.2 This analytical procedure is used in conjunction with the field procedure in Practice D5786.  
1.3 Limitations—The limitations of this technique for the determination of hydraulic properties of aquifers are primarily related to the correspondence between field situation and the simplifying assumption of the solution.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this practice.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of the practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without the consideration of a project’s many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 Well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 Well is of infinitesimal diameter and fully penetrates the aquifer, that is, the well is open to the full thickness of the aquifer.  
5.1.3 The nonleaky aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and areally extensive. A nonleaky aquifer receives insignificant contribution of water from confining beds.  
5.1.4 Discharge from the well is derived exclusively from storage in the aquifer.  
5.1.5 The geometry of the assumed aquifer and well conditions are shown in Fig. 1.    
5.2.3 Application of Theis Nonequilibrium Method to Unconfined Aquifers:  
5.2.3.1 Although the assumptions are applicable to confined conditions, the Theis solution may be applied to unconfined aquifers if drawdown is small compared with the saturated thickness of the aquifer or if the drawdown is corrected for reduction in thickness of the aquifer and the effects of delayed gravity yield are small.
5.2.3.2 Reduction in Aquifer Thickness—In an unconfined aquifer, dewatering occurs when the water levels decline in the vicinity of a pumping well. Corrections in drawdown need to be made when the drawdown is a significant fraction of the aquifer thickness as shown by Jacob (8). The drawdown, s, needs to be replaced by s′, the drawdown that would occur in an equivalent confined aquifer, where:
5.2.3.3 Gravity Yield Effects—In unconfined aquifers, delayed gravity yield effects may invalidate measurements of drawdown during the early part of the test for application to the Theis method. Effects of delayed gravity yield are negligible in partially penetrating observation wells at a distance, r, from the control well, where:
after the time, t, as given in the following equation from Neuman (9):
     where:
  Sy  =  the specific yield.  
For fully penetrating observation wells, the effects of delayed yield are negligible at the distance, r, in Eq 11 after one tenth of the time given in the Eq 12.
Note ...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining transmissivity and storage coefficient of a nonleaky confined aquifer under conditions of radial flow to a fully penetrating well of constant flux. This practice is a shortcut procedure used to apply the Theis nonequilibrium method. The Theis method is described in Practice D4106.  
1.2 This practice, along with others, is used in conjunction with the field procedure given in Test Method D4050.  
1.3 Limitations—The limitations of this practice are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation and the simplifying assumptions of this practice (see 5.1). Furthermore, application is valid only for values of u less than 0.01 (u is defined in Eq 2, in 8.6).  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design.  
1.5 Units—The values stated in either SI Units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Assumptions:  
5.1.1 The control well discharges at a constant rate, Q.  
5.1.2 The control well, observation wells, and piezometers are of infinitesimal diameter.  
5.1.3 The unconfined aquifer is homogeneous and really extensive.  
5.1.4 Discharge from the control well is derived initially from elastic storage in the aquifer, and later from gravity drainage from the water table.  
5.1.5 The geometry of the aquifer, control well, observation wells, and piezometers is shown in Fig. 2. The geometry of the test wells should be adjusted depending on the parameters of interest.
FIG. 2 Cross Section Through a Discharging Well Screened in Part of an Unconfined Aquifer  
5.2 Implications of Assumptions:  
5.2.1 Use of the Neuman (1) method assumes the control well is of infinitesimal diameter. The storage in the control well may adversely affect drawdown measurements obtained in the early part of the test. See 5.2.2 of Practice D4106 for assistance in determining the duration of the effects of well-bore storage on drawdown.  
5.2.2 If drawdown is large compared with the initial saturated thickness of the aquifer, the late-time drawdown may need to be adjusted for the effect of the reduction in saturated thickness. Section 5.2.3 of Practice D4106 provides guidance in correcting for the reduction in saturated thickness. According to Neuman  (1) such adjustments should be made only for late-time values.  
5.3 Practice D3740 provides evaluation factors for the activities in this practice.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this practice is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this practice are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself ensure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many fact...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers an analytical procedure for determining the transmissivity, storage coefficient, specific yield, and horizontal-to-vertical hydraulic conductivity ratio of an unconfined aquifer. It is used to analyze the drawdown of water levels in piezometers and partially or fully penetrating observation wells during pumping from a control well at a constant rate.  
1.2 The analytical procedure given in this practice is used in conjunction with Guide D4043 and Test Method D4050.  
1.3 The valid use of the Neuman method is limited to determination of transmissivities for aquifers in hydrogeologic settings with reasonable correspondence to the assumptions of the theory.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard. Reporting of test result in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.5.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated in the standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering data.  
1.6 This practice offers a set of in...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
6.1 The assumptions of the physical system are given as follows:  
6.1.1 The aquifer is of uniform thickness and confined by impermeable beds above and below.  
6.1.2 The aquifer is of constant homogeneous porosity and matrix compressibility and of homogeneous and isotropic hydraulic conductivity.  
6.1.3 The origin of the cylindrical coordinate system is taken to be on the well-bore axis at the top of the aquifer.  
6.1.4 The aquifer is fully screened.  
6.2 The assumptions made in defining the momentum balance are as follows:  
6.2.1 The average water velocity in the well is approximately constant over the well-bore section.  
6.2.2 Flow is laminar and frictional head losses from flow across the well screen are negligible.  
6.2.3 Flow through the well screen is uniformly distributed over the entire aquifer thickness.  
6.2.4 Change in momentum from the water velocity changing from radial flow through the screen to vertical flow in the well are negligible.  
6.2.5 The system response is an exponentially decaying sinusoidal function.
Note 3: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers determination of transmissivity from the measurement of the damped oscillation about the equilibrium water level of a well-aquifer system to a sudden change of water level in a well. Underdamped response of water level in a well to a sudden change in water level is characterized by oscillatory fluctuation about the static water level with a decrease in the magnitude of fluctuation and recovery to initial water level. Underdamped response may occur in wells tapping highly transmissive confined aquifers and in deep wells having long water columns.  
1.2 This analytical procedure is used in conjunction with the field procedure Test Method D4044/D4044M for collection of test data.  
1.3 Limitations—Slug tests are considered to provide an estimate of transmissivity of a confined aquifer. This test method requires that the storage coefficient be known. Assumptions of this practice prescribe a fully penetrating well (a well open through the full thickness of the aquifer), but the slug test method is commonly conducted using a partially penetrating well. Such a practice may be acceptable for application under conditions in which the aquifer is stratified and horizontal hydraulic conductivity is much greater than vertical hydraulic conductivity. In such a case the test would be considered to be representative of the average hydraulic conductivity of the portion of the aquifer adjacent to the open interval of the well. The method assumes laminar flow and is applicable for a slug test in which the initial water-level displacement is less than 0.1 or 0.2 of the length of the static water column.  
1.4 This practice for analysis presented here is derived by van der Kamp (1)2 based on an approximation of the underdamped response to that of an exponentially damped sinusoid. A more rigorous analysis of the response of wells to a sudden change in water level by Kipp (2) indicates that the method presented by van der Kamp (1) matches the solution of Kipp (2) when the damping parameter values are less than about 0.2 and time greater than that of the first peak of the oscillation (2).  
1.5 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore each system shall be used independe...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 An appropriately developed, executed and documented equipment decontamination practice is an integral and essential part of waste site investigations. The benefits of its use include:  
5.1.1 Minimizing the spread of contaminants within a study area and from site to site,  
5.1.2 Reducing the potential for worker exposure by means of contact with contaminated sampling equipment or hazardous materials,  
5.1.3 Improved data quality and reliability.  
5.1.4 Minimizing the amount of decontamination fluids or wastes generated.  
5.1.5 Reducing personnel exposures to chemicals used in, or released by decontamination.  
5.1.6 Minimizing or eliminating the use of hazardous materials in the decontamination process, and  
5.1.7 Selecting equipment based on total life-cycle costs including labor, waste containment, disposal, treatment and additional analytical costs, such as using dedicated or disposable equipment rather than decontaminating between uses.  
5.2 This practice is not a substitute for a well-documented Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program. Because the ultimate test of a decontamination process is its ability to minimize erroneous data, a reasonable QA/QC program must be implemented.  
5.3 This practice may not be applicable to all waste sites. When a sampling effort is completed to determine only the general range of chemical concentrations of interest, then less rigorous decontamination processes can be adequate. Less rigorous decontamination procedures may also be used when cleaning non-porous surfaces, such as metal surfaces as well. Investigators should have the flexibility to modify the decontamination process with due consideration for the sampling objective or if QA/QC documentation supports alternative decontamination methods.  
5.4 At sites where the reactivity of sampling equipment to decontamination washes creates concern for the generation of undesirable chemical by-products, or will potentially damage the equipment surface...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the decontamination of field equipment used in the sampling of soils, soil gas, sludges, surface water, and groundwater at waste sites which are to undergo both physical and chemical analyses.  
1.2 This practice is applicable only at sites where chemical (organic and inorganic) wastes are a concern. It is not intended for use at radiological, mixed (chemical and radiological), or biohazard sites. This practice does not address regulatory requirements for the handling, labeling, shipping, or storing of wastes or samples.  
1.3 Practices are included for the decontamination of equipment which comes into contact with the sample matrix (sample contacting equipment) and for ancillary equipment that has not contacted the portion of sample to be analyzed (non-sample contacting equipment), but which must be cleaned to avoid spreading of contamination.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use when field equipment used for sampling will be decontaminated in the field or returned from the field. Information on the construction of field decontamination facilities and non-sample contacting equipment decontamination is also provided.  
1.5 This practice is based on commonly recognized methods by which equipment may be decontaminated. The practices described for sample contacting equipment are commonly prescribed. Background studies are included in the References at the end of this standard (1-5). The user is reminded of the importance of proper decontamination planning to minimize the amount of decontamination wastes generated and to reduce or eliminate the use of cleaning agents that are themselves hazardous. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) samples that document decontamination effectiveness can be used to modify or enhance decontamination techniques. Decontamination at radiologically contaminated sites should refer to Practice D5608.  
1.6 This practice is applicable to most conventional sampl...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The 1998 edition of this standard was written solely for selection of drilling methods for environmental applications and specifically for installation of groundwater monitoring wells. The second revision was made to include geotechnical applications since many of the advantages, disadvantages, and limitations discussed extensively throughout this document also apply to geotechnical design use such as data collection (sampling and in-situ testing) for construction design and instrumentation. Besides installation of monitoring wells (D5092/D5092M, D6724/D6724M), Environmental investigations are also made for sampling, in-situ testing, and installation of aquifer testing boreholes (D4044/D4044M, D4050).  
4.2 There are other guides for geotechnical investigations addressing drilling methods such as in Eurocode (1, 2)5, U.S. Federal Highway Administration, (3, 4), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (5), and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (6, 7). An authoritative Handbook on Environmental Site Characterization and Ground-Water Monitoring was compiled by Nielsen (8) which addresses drilling methods in detail including the advent of Direct Push methods developed for environmental investigations. Two other major drilling guides have been written by the National Drilling Association (9) and from the Australia Drilling Industry Training Committee (10) and these guides are user for the drillers.  
4.3 Table 1 lists sixteen classes of methods addressed in this guide. The selection of particular method(s) for drilling/push boring requires that specific characteristics of each site be considered. This guide is intended to make the user aware of some of the various drilling/push boring methods available and the applications, advantages, and disadvantages of each with respect to determining geotechnical and environmental exploration. (A) Actual achievable drilled depths will vary depending on the ambient geohydrologic conditions existing at the site and size of drilling/push boring e...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides descriptions of various methods for site characterization along with advantages and disadvantages associated with each method discussed. This guide is intended to aid in the selection of drilling method(s) for geotechnical and environmental soil and rock borings for sampling, testing, and installation of wells, or other instrumentation. It does not address drilling for foundation improvement, drinking water wells, or special horizontal drilling techniques for utilities.  
1.2 This guide cannot address all possible subsurface conditions that may occur such as, geologic, topographic, climatic, or anthropogenic. Site evaluation for engineering, design, and construction purposes is addressed in Guide D420. Soil and rock sampling in drill holes is addressed in Guide D6169/D6169M. Pertinent guides and practices addressing specific drilling methods, equipment, and procedures are listed in Section 2. Guide D5730 provides information on most all aspects of environmental site characterization.  
1.3 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units (given in brackets) are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the standard.  
1.4 This guide does not purport to comprehensively address all methods and the issues associated with drilling for geotechnical and environmental purposes. Users should seek qualified professionals for decisions as to the proper equipment and methods that would be most successful for their site investigation. Other methods may be available for these methods and qualified professionals should have flexibility to exercise judgment as to possible alternatives not covered in this guide. The guide is current at the time of issue, but new alternative methods may become available prior ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 General—Passive groundwater sampling has increased use since the polyethylene diffusion bag sampler was first introduced (5). As defined above, different types of passive samplers are now available with different functions and usages. The Interstate Technology Regulatory Council (ITRC) has provided several technical and regulatory documents on the use of passive groundwater sampling methods (1, 5-7). Collectively, these documents have provided information and references on the technical basis for their use, comparison of sampling results with more traditional sampling methods, descriptions of their proper use, limitations, and a survey of their acceptance and use by responding state regulators. However, the ITRC documents are older and do not include more recent assessments and publications. This Standard seeks to provide newer information on current practice and implementation of passive groundwater sampling techniques.  
4.1.1 Because of the large number of passive samplers that have been developed over the years for various types of environmental sampling, it is beyond the scope of this standard to discuss separately each of the methods that could or can be used to sample groundwater. Extensive literature reviews on diffusion- and accumulation-passive samplers can be found in the scientific literature (that is, 3, 8-14). These reviews provide information on a wide variety of passive sampling devices for use in air, soil vapor, and water. A review paper on the use of diffusion and accumulation-type passive samplers specifically for sampling volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in groundwater (15) includes information on other passive samplers that are not included in the ITRC documents (1, 7) and discusses their use with respect to measuring mass flux.  
4.2 Use—Passive samplers are deployed at a pre-determined depth, or depths, within a well for a minimum or pre-determined period of time. They should remain submerged at the target depth for their entire deploy...
SCOPE
1.1 This standard provides guidance and information on passive sampling techniques for collecting groundwater from monitoring wells. Passive groundwater samplers are able to acquire a sample from the screen interval in a well, without the active transport associated with a pump or purge technique (1).2 Passive groundwater sampling is a type of no-purge groundwater sampling method where the samplers are left in the well for a predetermined period of time prior to collecting the sample.  
1.2 Methods for sampling monitoring wells include low-flow purging and sampling methods, traditional well-volume purging and sampling methods, post-purge grab sampling methods (for example, using a bailer), passive no-purge sampling methods, and active no-purge sampling methods such as using a bailer to collect a sample without purging the well. This guide focuses on passive no-purge sampling methodologies for collecting groundwater samples. These methodologies include the use of diffusion samplers, accumulation samplers, and passive-grab samplers. This guide provides information on the use, advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of each of these passive sampling technologies.  
1.3 ASTM Standard D653 provides standard terminology relevant to soil, rock, and fluids contained in them. ASTM Standard D4448 provides a standard guide to sampling groundwater wells, and ASTM Standards D5903 and D6089 provide guides for planning and documenting a sampling event. Groundwater samples may require preservation (Guide D6517), filtration (Guide D6564/D6564M), and measures to pack and ship samples (Guide D6911). Standard D7069 provides guidance on the quality control and quality assurance of sampling events. ASTM Standard D5092/D5092M provides standard practice for the design and installation of groundwater monitoring wells, ASTM Standard D5521/D5521M provides a standard guide for developing groundwater monitoring wells in granular aquifers, and D...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 An adequately designed and installed surface protection system will mitigate the consequences of natural damage (e.g., freeze/thaw damage) in susceptible areas, or anthropogenic damages, which could otherwise occur and result in either changes to water level and/or groundwater quality data, or complete loss of the monitoring well.  
4.2 The extent of application of this practice may depend upon the importance of the monitoring data, cost of monitoring well replacement, expected or design life of the monitoring well, the presence or absence of potential risks, and setting or location of the well.  
4.3 Monitoring well surface protection should be a part of the well design process, and installation of the protective system should be completed at the time of monitoring well installation and development.  
4.4 Information determined at the time of installation of the protective system will form a baseline for future monitoring well inspection and maintenance. Additionally, elements of the protection system will satisfy some regulatory requirements such as for protection of near surface groundwater and well identification.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice identifies design and construction considerations to be applied to monitoring wells for protection from events, which may impair the intended purpose of the well such as water level or water quality monitoring data.  
1.2 The installation and development of a well is a costly and detailed activity with the goal of providing representative samples and data throughout the design life of the well. Damage to the well at the surface frequently results in the loss of the well or can potentially impact measured water level and/or groundwater quality data. This standard provides for access control so that tampering with the installation should be evident.  
1.3 This practice may be applied to other surface or subsurface monitoring devices, such as piezometers, permeameters, temperature or moisture monitors, or seismic devices.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The inch/pound units given in parentheses are for information only. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as non-conformance with the standard.  
1.5 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026, unless superseded by this standard.  
1.6 This practice offers a set of instructions for performing one or more specific operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Withdrawal or injection well test field procedures are used with appropriate analytical procedures in appropriate hydrogeological sites to determine transmissivity and storage coefficient of aquifers and hydraulic conductivity of confining beds.  
5.2 Practice D3740 provides evaluation factors for the activities in this test method.
Note 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.  
5.3 This test method may be limited due to the correspondence between the field situation determined by this test method and the simplifying assumptions of the analytical Test Methods D4105/D4105M or D4106 and D4043.
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers the field procedure for selecting well locations, controlling change (discharge or injection) rates, and measuring water levels used to analyze the hydraulic properties of an aquifer or aquifers and adjacent confining beds.  
1.2 This test method is used in conjunction with an analytical procedure such as Test Methods D4105/D4105M or D4106 to evaluate the data and determine aquifer properties.  
1.3 The appropriate field and analytical procedures are selected as described in Guide D4043.  
1.4 Limitations—The limitations of this test method are primarily related to the correspondence between the field situation determined by this test method and the simplifying assumptions of the analytical Test Methods D4105/D4105M or D4106 and D4043.  
1.5 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.6 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.6.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analytical methods for engineering design.  
1.7 This test method offers a set of instructions for performing one or more operations. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgement. Not all aspects of this standard may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a projects many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus process.  
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization e...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide is limited to the description of test methods typical for measurement of ground water discharge from a control well.  
4.1.1 Controlled field tests are the primary means of determining aquifer properties. Most mathematical equations developed for analyzing field tests require measurement of control well discharge.  
4.1.2 Discharge may be needed for evaluation of well design and efficiency.  
4.1.3 For aquifer tests, a conceptual model should be prepared to evaluate the proper test method and physical test requirements, such as well placement and design (see Guide D4043). Review the site data for consistency with the conceptual model. Revise the conceptual model as appropriate and consider the implications on the planned activities.  
4.1.4 For aquifer tests, the discharge rate should be sufficient to cause significant stress of the aquifer without violating test assumptions. Conditions that may violate test assumptions include conversion of the aquifer from confined to unconfined conditions, lowering the water level in the control well to below the top of the well screen, causing a well screen entrance velocity that promotes well development during the test, or decreasing the filter pack permeability characteristics.  
4.1.5 Some test methods described here are not applicable to injection well tests.  
4.2 This guide does not apply to test methods used in measurement of flow of other fluids used in industrial operations, such as waste water, sludge, oil, and chemicals.
Note 1: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors;...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers an overview of methods to measure well discharge. This guide is an integral part of a series of standards prepared on the in-situ determination of hydraulic properties of aquifer systems by single- or multiple-well tests. Measurement of well discharge is a common requirement to the determination of aquifer and well hydraulic properties.  
1.2 This guide does not establish a fixed procedure for any method described. Rather, it describes different methods for measuring discharge from a pumping or flowing well. A pumping well is one type of control well. A control well can also be an injection well or a well in which slug tests are conducted.  
1.3 This guide does not address borehole flow meters that are designed for measuring vertical or horizontal flow within a borehole.  
1.4 Units—The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units [presented in brackets] are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard. Reporting of results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
1.5 This guide offers an organized collection of information or a series of options and does not recommend a specific course of action. This document cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this guide may be applicable in all circumstances. This ASTM standard is not intended to represent or replace the standard of care by which the adequacy of a given professional service must be judged, nor should this document be applied without consideration of a project's many unique aspects. The word “Standard” in the title of this document means only that the document has been approved through the ASTM consensus ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Conceptualization and characterization of a groundwater system is fundamental to any qualitative or quantitative analysis. This conceptualization begins with simple abstractions in the investigator's mind, emphasizing the major components of the studied system, that can be rendered in qualitative terms or simple illustrations. The extent of further development of the representation of the system depends on the character of the groundwater problem and the project objective. The abstract concept may suffice, or it may be further defined and quantified through use of analytical models of increasing complexity, and, in some cases, numerical models may be employed. If numerical models are used, the level of detail and sophistication of features represented in the model is likely to increase as the project develops. Evolution of conceptualization of a groundwater flow system should be terminated when the results of the related analyses are sufficient for the problem being addressed.  
5.2 This guide may be used in the following:  
5.2.1 Evaluating natural variations in groundwater flow systems.  
5.2.2 Evaluating anthropogenic stresses on groundwater flow systems, such as pumping for water supply, irrigation, induced infiltration, or well injection.  
5.2.3 Evaluating presence and velocity of groundwater contaminants.  
5.2.4 Designing and selecting mathematical models to simulate groundwater systems; and completing model schematization and attribution based on the problem defined, characterized groundwater flow system, and model(s) selected.  
5.2.5 Designing groundwater remediation systems.  
5.3 This guide is a flexible description of specific techniques and investigation requirements; methods defined by other ASTM Standards or non-ASTM techniques may be appropriate in some circumstances and, after due consideration, some of the techniques herein may be omitted, altered, or enhanced.  
5.3.1 A comprehensive list of items to be considered conceptualization a...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers an integrated, stepwise method for the qualitative conceptualization and quantitative characterization of groundwater flow systems, including the unsaturated zone, for natural or human-induced behavior or changes.  
1.2 This guide may be used at any scale of investigation, including site-specific, subregional, and regional applications.  
1.3 This guide describes an iterative process for developing multiple working hypotheses for characterizing groundwater flow systems. This process aims at reducing uncertainty with respect to conceptual models, observation, interpretation, and analysis in terms of hypothesis and refinement of the most likely conceptual model of the groundwater flow system. The process is also aimed at reducing the range of realistic values for parameters identified during the characterization process. This guide does not address the quantitative uncertainty associated with specific methods of hydrogeologic and groundwater system characterization and quantification, for example, the effects of well construction on water-level measurement.  
1.4 This guide addresses the general procedure, types of data needed, and references that enable the investigator to complete the process of analysis and interpretation of each data type with respect to geohydrologic processes and hydrogeologic framework. This guide recommends the groups of data and analysis to be used during each step of the conceptualization process.  
1.5 This guide does not address the specific methods for characterizing hydrogeologic and groundwater system properties.  
1.6 This guide does not address model selection, design, or attribution for use in the process of groundwater flow system characterization and quantification. This guide does not address the process of model schematization, including the simplification of hydrologic systems and the representation of hydrogeologic parameters in models.  
1.7 This guide d...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This standard test method is intended as an index test to determine the organic treat loading of organophilic clay. This standard test method can be used for manufacturing quality control and construction quality assurance material evaluation.  
5.2 The percent organic treat loading of organophilic clay is a relative indicator of its adsorptive capacity. Organophilic clay is used for remediation of contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.  
5.3 The two test methods denote different devices, a muffle furnace and a thermal gravimetric analyzer. The thermal gravimetric analyzer may be programmed to reach a higher temperature than the muffle furnace, but the organic matter will be burnt off at 750 °C.
Note 3: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
SCOPE
1.1 This standard covers two index test methods that can be used in the evaluation of the amount of organic compound chemically bonded to the base clay portion of a representative sample of organophilic clay.  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.
Note 1: This standard is presented using SI units. Use of units other than SI is allowed. However, if other units are used, the performance of a units conversion check of the calculations should be included as a part of the calculations.  
1.3 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.3.1 Two test methods are provided in this standard. The methods differ in equipment, the size of the specimen (mass) required and the significant digits reported.  
1.3.2 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of the reported data to be commensurate with these considerations. It is beyond the scope of this standard to consider significant digits used in analysis methods for engineering design.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Test Method—The constant pressure injection test method is used to determine the transmissivity and storativity of low-permeability formations surrounding packed-off intervals. Advantages of the method are: (1) it avoids the effect of well-bore storage, (2) it may be employed over a wide range of rock mass permeabilities, and (3) it is considerably shorter in duration than the conventional pump and slug tests used in more permeable rocks.  
5.2 Analysis—The transient water flow rate data obtained using the suggested test method are evaluated by the curve-matching technique described by Jacob and Lohman (1)4 and extended to analysis of single fractures by Doe et al. (2). If the water flow rate attains steady state, it may be used to calculate the transmissivity of the test interval (3).  
Note 2: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of Practice D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results. Reliable results depend on many factors; Practice D3740 provides a means of evaluating some of those factors.
Note 3: The function of wells in any unconfined setting in a fractured terrain might make the determination of k problematic because the wells might only intersect tributary or subsidiary channels or conduits. The problems determining the k of a channel or conduit notwithstanding, the partial penetration of tributary channels may make determination of a meaningful number difficult. If plots of k in carbonates and other fractured settings are made and compared, they may show no indication that there are conduits or channels present, except when with the lowest probability one maybe intersected by a borehole and can be verified, such pr...
SCOPE
1.1 This test method covers a field procedure for determining the transmissivity and storativity of geological formations having permeabilities lower than 10−3 μm2  (1 millidarcy) using constant head injection.  
1.2 The transmissivity and storativity values determined by this test method provide a good approximation of the capacity of the zone of interest to transmit water, if the test intervals are representative of the entire zone and the surrounding rock is fully water-saturated.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. Reporting of test results in units other than SI shall not be regarded as nonconformance with this standard.  
Note 1: Unit Conversions—The permeability of a formation is often expressed in terms of the unit darcy (non-SI). A porous medium has a permeability of 1 Darcy when a fluid of viscosity 1 cp (1 mPa·s) flows through it at a rate of 1 cm3/s (10–6 m3/s)/1 cm2 (10–4 m2) cross-sectional area at a pressure differential of 1 atm (101.4 kPa)/1 cm (10 mm) of length. One Darcy corresponds to 0.987 μm2. For water as the flowing fluid at 20°C, a hydraulic conductivity of 9.66 μm/s corresponds to a permeability of 1 Darcy. Permeabilities may also be expressed as millidarcy (md), which is not an SI unit.  
1.4 All observed and calculated values shall conform to the guidelines for significant digits and rounding established in Practice D6026.  
1.4.1 The procedures used to specify how data are collected/recorded or calculated, in this standard are regarded as the industry standard. In addition, they are representative of the significant digits that generally should be retained. The procedures used do not consider material variation, purpose for obtaining the data, special purpose studies, or any considerations for the user’s objectives; and it is common practice to increase or reduce significant digits of repor...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Soil gas is simply the gas phase (air) that exists in the open spaces between soil particles in the unsaturated portion of the vadose zone. VOCs can potentially migrate through the soil, or ground water, or both, and present an impact to the environment and human health.
Note 1: Not all VOCs in soil gas are due to spills or leaks. Simple VOCs, such as acetone, methanol, and ethanol may also arise from natural biological processes.  
5.2 Application of Soil Gas Surveys—Soil gas surveying offers an effective, quick and cost-effective method of detecting volatile contaminants in the vadose zone. Soil gas surveying has been demonstrated to be effective for selection of suitable and representative samples for other more costly and definitive investigative methods. This method is highly useful at the initiation of the preliminary site investigation for determining the existence and extent of volatile or semi volatile organic contamination, and determination of location of highest concentrations, as well as, monitoring the effectiveness of on-going remedial activities (D6196).  
5.3 Samples are collected by inserting a sampling device into a borehole with hydraulically-driven direct push drilling or manually-driven driven hand sampling equipment (see Note 2).
Note 2: Soil gas sampling can be performed beneath impervious surfaces, such as concrete slabs or pavement by drilling or boring through the surface.  
5.4 Soil gas surveys can be performed over a wide range of spatial designs. Spatial designs include soil gas sampling in profiles or grid patterns at a single depth or multiple depths. Multiple depth sampling is particularly useful for contaminant determinations in cases with complex soil type distribution and multiple sources. Depth profiling can also be useful in the determination of the most appropriate depth(s) at which to monitor soil gas, as well as the demonstration of migration and degradation processes in the vadose zone.  
5.5 Soil gas surveys are...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice details the collection of active soil gas samples using a variety of sample collection techniques with tooling associated with direct push drilling (DP) or manual-driven hand-sampling equipment, for the express purpose of conducting soil gas surveys.  
1.2 This practice proceeds on the premise that soil gas surveys are primarily used for two (2) purposes: 1) as a preliminary site investigative tool and 2) for the monitoring of ongoing remediation activities (D7663).  
1.3 The practicality of field use demands that soil gas surveys are relatively accurate, as well as being simple, quick, and inexpensive. This guide suggests that the objective of soil gas surveys is linked to three factors:  
1.3.1 VOC detection and quantitation, including determination of depth of VOC contamination.  
1.3.2 Sample retrieval ease and time.  
1.3.3 Cost.  
1.4 This practice may increase the awareness of a fundamental difference between soil gas sampling for the purpose of soil gas surveys versus sub-slab or vapor intrusion investigations or both. Specifically, the purpose of a soil gas survey is to provide quick and inexpensive data to the investigator that will allow the investigator to 1) develop a site investigation plan that is strategic in its efforts, 2) determine success or progress of on-going remedial activities, or 3) select the most suitable subsequent investigation equipment, or combinations thereof. On the other hand, the objective of soil gas sampling for sub-slab and vapor intrusion investigations is not preliminary, but rather the end result of the site investigation or long-term precise monitoring. As such, stringent sampling methods and protocol are necessary for precise samples and data collection.  
1.5 Details included in this practice include a broad spectrum of practices and applications of soil gas surveys, including:  
1.5.1 Sample recovery and handling,  
1.5.2 Sample analysis,  
1.5.3 D...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Decommissioning of boreholes and monitoring wells, and other devices requires that the specific characteristics of each site be considered. The wide variety of geological, biological, and physical conditions, construction practices, and chemical composition of the surrounding soil, rock, waste, and groundwater precludes the use of a single decommissioning practice. The procedures discussed in this guide are intended to aid the geologist or engineer in selecting the tasks needed to plan, choose materials for, and carry out an effective permanent decommissioning operation. Each individual situation should be evaluated separately and the appropriate technology applied to meet site conditions. Considerations for selection of appropriate procedures are presented in this guide, but other considerations based on site specific conditions should also be considered.
Note 6: Ideally, decommissioning should be considered as an integral part of the design of the monitoring well. Planning at this early stage can make the decommissioning activity easier to accomplish. See Practice D5092 for details on monitoring well construction.  
5.2 This guide is intended to provide technical information and is not intended to supplant statutes or regulations of local governing bodies. Approval of the appropriate regulatory authorities should be an important consideration during the decommissioning process. This practice is in general accordance with other national and state guidance documents on well decommissioning (ANSI/NGWA-01-14 [1]1 and California EPA [2].
Note 7: The quality of the result produced by this standard is dependent on the competence of the personnel performing it, and the suitability of the equipment and facilities used. Agencies that meet the criteria of D3740 are generally considered capable of competent and objective testing/sampling/inspection/etc. Users of this standard are cautioned that compliance with Practice D3740 does not in itself assure reliable results...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers procedures that are specifically related to permanent decommissioning (closure) of the following as applied to environmental activities. It is intended for use where solid or hazardous materials or wastes are found, or where conditions occur requiring the need for decommissioning. The following devices are considered in this guide:  
1.1.1 A borehole used for geoenvironmental purposes (see Note 1),  
1.1.2 Monitoring wells,  
1.1.3 Observation wells,  
1.1.4 Injection wells (see Note 2),  
1.1.5 Piezometers,  
1.1.6 Wells used for the extraction of contaminated groundwater, the removal of floating or submerged materials other than water such as gasoline or tetrachloroethylene, or other devices used for the extraction of soil gas,  
1.1.7 A borehole used to construct a monitoring well, and  
1.1.8 Any other well or boring that houses a vadose zone monitoring device.  
1.2 Temporary decommissioning of the above is not covered in this guide.  
Note 1: This guide may be used to decommission boreholes where no contamination is observed at a site (see Practice D420 for details); however, the primary use of the guide is to decommission boreholes and wells where solid or hazardous waste have been identified. Methods identified in this guide can also be used in other situations such as the decommissioning of water supply wells and boreholes where water contaminated with nonhazardous pollutants (such as nitrates or sulfates) are present. This guide should be consulted in the event that routine geotechnical studies indicate the presence of contamination at a site. Consult and follow national, state, or local regulations as they may control required decommissioning procedures.
Note 2: The term “well” is used in this guide to denote monitoring wells, piezometers, or other devices constructed in a manner similar to a well. Some of the devices listed such as injection and extraction wells can be decomm...