SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

California Laboratory Services`i 03/11/93 n L MAR 15 1993 ATTN: Dale Parks EAVIRONMENTAL HEALTH San Joaquin County Public Health Service PERMIT>SEFZVICCS Environmental Health Division PO Box 2009 Stockton, Ca 95201 Dear Dale, In reference to: Project: Fred Clark AELC ID No: L8678 Client: Wheeldon &Associates Samples: Pump-1, 2-W, 2-E, SP-1, SP-2 Received: 4/13/92 Reported: 4/30/93 Per your request I have reviewed these data. The variance between the analytical results on Sample 2-W for xylenes by EPA 8020 and EPA 8240 initially seems exceptional. Considering the inherent inhomogeneity of soil samples, the fact that two separate soil extractions were performed and a dilution was performed on the EPA 8020 analysis, the correspondence is not out of line. The main point here is that this sample contains considerable amounts of gasoline. The second point you wished me to address was the high Report Limit used with the EPA m8015 Diesel analytical report on Sample#1. The raised Report Limit is due to the 1:50 dilution which was performed on the sample prior to analysis. This dilution was required because of the high concentration of gasoline present, as demonstrated by the elevated BTXE compounds. Without the dilution the gasoline components would have overwhelmed the detector and provided no results for either gasoline or diesel. The best that can be done in this circumstance is to perform the analysis on a diluted sample and report the results with the raised Report Limit. These results indicate that gasoline, and not diesel, is the primary contaminant in the sample. Please let me know if I can provide any other information for you. Sincerely, Larry A. oney, PhD Senior Project Manager y HECYIEDPAPEF 3249 Fitzgerald Road Rancho Cordova, CA 95742 (916)638-7301 Fax(916)638-4510