ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0011058 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' Geological red=s lutc Page 5 Groundwater Monitoring Report Project No 724 2 February 7,2005 iAs required under AB2886, the laboratory data was submitted electronically to GeoTracker on December 28, 2004 (confirmation #2544467449) and groundwater elevation was submitted electronically to GeoTracker on December 28, 2004 (confirmation #5523116886) t2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION The results of the groundwater sample analyses indicate the following 1 Non-detect Well • Wells MW-1, MW-3, MW-4, MW-5, MW-11, MW-104, MW-109, MW-110, MW-111 and MW-210 did not contain petroleum hydrocarbon contaminants above the laboratory reporting limits 2 Dry Well • Well MW-6 was dry and not sampled 3 TPH-G • With the exception of MW-2, which contained 83 0 [tg/L TPH-G, the shallow wells did not contain TPH-G above laboratory reporting limits • Intermediate wells MW-106, MW-107 and MW-108 contained 151, 97 8 and 813 lug/l TPH-G, respectively • Deep well MW-208 contained 364 tg/l TPH-G 4 MTBE ' • None of the shallow wells contained MTBE above laboratory reporting limits • Intermediate wells MW-106 and MW-107 contained 15 3 and 6 4 µg/1 MTBE, respectively • Deep wells MW-208 and MW-209 contained 4 4 and 5 9 µg/l MTBE, respectively 5 Benzene ' • None of the shallow wells contained Benzene above the laboratory reporting limits • Intermediate wells MW-106 and MW-108 contained 0 7 and 0 6 µg/1 Benzene, ' respectively • Deep well MW-208 contained 1 1 [igll Benzene ' The distribution of groundwater contaminants is summarized as follows ' (Note The Isoconcentration contours are generated utilizing the SURFER® computer modeling program We recognize that computer generated contour maps do not provide the most accurate representation of what is taking place in the field However, even hand- contoured map at best provide a shadow of reality Both need to be looked at as interpretation, not reality}