Laserfiche WebLink
LEAkWXTER <br /> c R 0 u r <br /> • Environmental Servrcrs <br /> request and directed monitoring of the groundwater for two additional quarters to complete four <br /> continuous quarters of monitoring following active remediation <br /> Four quarters of verification monitoring were completed with the third quarter 2000 event Based on <br /> those results, Clearwater requested reconsideration of site closure The SJCPHS/EHD concurred with <br /> the closure recommendation and forwarded the case to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality <br /> Control Board (CVRWQCB) for concurrence on December 27, 2000 The CVRWQCB did not concur <br /> with the closure request and forwarded the project back to the SJCPHS/EHD for additional oversight, in <br /> a letter dated January 25, 2001 The primary concern of the CVRWQCB was that residual dissolved- <br /> phase MTBE concentrations in MW-2 were above primary Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLS) and <br /> the trend at the very end of monitoring appeared to be unstable <br /> Based on these conditions, Clearwater resumed monitoring of groundwater at the project in February <br /> 2001 <br /> Groundwater Monitonng Methods <br /> On April 2, 2001, Clearwater attempted to monitor all project monitoring and remediation wells An <br /> electronic water level indicator was used to gauge depth to water accurate to within ±0 01-feet Wells <br /> ® RW-1 (silted in from soil vapor extraction), VW-1, VW-2, VW-3, and VW-4 were dry, and therefore <br /> removed from the sampling schedule tlus event All wells were also checked for the presence of Light <br /> Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) gasoline product prior to purging No measurable thicknesses of <br /> LNAPL were observed in any of the wells Monitoring was performed in accordance with Clearwater's <br /> Field Protocols (attached) <br /> The wells with measurable water columns (MW-1 through MW-7, SW-1, SW-2, and Domestic Well) <br /> were purged until sampling parameters (e g temperature, pH and conductivity) stabilized, which <br /> occurred by approximately three wet casing volumes Groundwater monitoring and well purging <br /> information was recorded on Gauge Data/Purge Calculations and Purge Data sheets (attached) <br /> Following recovery of water levels to at least 80% of their static levels, groundwater samples were <br /> collected from the monitoring wells using dedicated polyethylene bailers Samples were transferred to <br /> laboratory supplied containers, labeled, documented on a chain-of-custody form, and placed on ice in a <br /> cooler for transport to the project laboratory <br /> Purging devices were decontaminated between wells in an Alconox® wash followed by double rinse in <br /> clean tap water to prevent cross-contamination Purge water and rinseate was stored on-site in labeled <br /> 55-gallons drums pending future removal and disposal <br /> All groundwater samples were analyzed by Kiff Analytical, a DHS-certified laboratory located in Davis, <br /> California Groundwater samples were analyzed for concentrations of TPHg, BTEX, and MTBE by EPA <br /> Method 8260B <br /> ZB107C GWMR 2Q01 3 April 9 2001 <br />