Laserfiche WebLink
NO'! <br /> d March <br /> 991, and areeshv wn in Tables 2-1 and 2 2, respectiv ly. The flow, <br /> 1g,.1, and adient of 0.2% <br /> direction was southerly on both occasions with a gr <br /> (Figure 2-2). <br /> Table 2-1 <br /> 31aroh 7,1991 GyaundwaterEleautions <br /> Elevati no Depm to aW ter GW Elevation <br /> FTMW <br /> Casing -28.33 ft -22.73 ft <br /> +5.60 ft -22.51 ft <br /> +5.89 ft -28.33 ft -22.71 ft <br /> +5.62 -28.33 ft <br /> +5.86 ft -28.56 ft -22.70 ft <br /> Table 2-2 <br /> March 29,1991 Groundwater Elevations <br /> Elevation Depth to Water GW Elevation <br /> Well# Caste -27.76 ft -22.16 ft <br /> MW-1 +5.60 ft -21.96 ft <br /> MW-2 +5.89 ft -27.85 ft -22.13 ft <br /> MW-3 +'1.62 ft -27.75 ft <br /> • MW-4 <br /> +5.86 ft -27.99 ft -22.13 ft <br /> Following water level measurements, Teflon hailers were used to <br /> purge the wells prior to sampling. The bailers were decontaminated <br /> prior to purging each well by washing with an Alconox sgl well and <br /> ri <br /> triple-rinsing with deionized water. Each monitong well was <br /> the <br /> purged until recovery of water from theeilre s lessarge twas an SsOlow fand <br /> bailer volume capacity. At this pont, <br /> sampling was initiated even though fewer thanPH es and temperatu3 well volumes re <br /> been removed from any well. Conductivity, 2-3 summarizes <br /> measurements were taken during purging. <br /> the number of well volumes removed from each well and the pH, <br /> temperature and conductivity in each well prior to sampling. <br /> 2-5 <br /> -z <br />