Laserfiche WebLink
IIL1111 u1,V ri,,lul 5 \t 111111 �,,Lofid QIL ITILr 'llitil t,uxind�N 00 'Vinnitt>nng <br /> July 41 20M <br /> 1'w e 1 <br /> mantiFaLtllrLr", ILL11171[I1L11[ILd ,,tandald5 I IlL V4alL.r 1L'.L1 111 LaLh wLlI wa, lrleaSLirLd to thL IlLarLSt 0 W foot with <br /> I hattLl_ -,spLrAtLd tllt-tapL eater-ILvLI int-ter \ new ds,,pnSahle p0l}e1l1-\leI1L badLr was lilwLred Into each <br /> wLll tc1 L01ILLI a 1-jeld-1175peLt1011 SamplL I hL hailer Sa[nplL tira5 IIISPLLtLd tut floating produLt Shcen <br /> d15Loloratlon and,m ildoi I loating produLt nt SItLLIIS wcrL not uhSLr\Ld in thL Iroundwatcr rcI11o\Ld lrom any <br /> 111 thL 111,11,11,11 \%L115 1111111, thL groundwater Salnplint,3 Strout) pLtroleuln hydrocarbon odor was noted in the <br /> 1]I0LlndwatCj rLLcl\crLd front MW ' \ll pL(rolLLll71 1lydroLarbon odor was I10tLd In thL grotindwatLi rCLovLred <br /> from MW-i BIW-5 and MW-4 <br /> Flit purging and ,implin, SLquLIILL for the nlntlltllr wLlls was V1W-I MW-4 MW-3 and V1W ' f aLh well <br /> was ptnged with a new disposahl1- polycthylLnL hailer until thrLL well-LaSn12, volumLS of watLr had bLen <br /> rLInllvLd and 1111- LILLtrlcal conduLti%ity pIl and tLl-nperaturL of thL watLr had Stabilized the purgL water was <br /> dtsLhargLd to »-galIon drum,, and ILIt un Site to awalt drspo,,al (lroundwatLr Monitoring Held l arms are <br /> includLd rn '\ppLndi\ <br /> A gioundwatLr ,amp]L was L01lected from caLh well by tilling a IlLw di,,po,,able polyLth,lLnc bailer with <br /> groundwater and tran,,!erring the groundwater to two 40-intllditer glass vials fitted with l eflonr�-fined caps The <br /> vials were checked to assure that no air bubble,, were present Lath samplt- container was labeled and placed In a <br /> cooler chilled with ice and delivered under chain-ot-custody procedures to (1eoAnalytical Laboratories, Inc in <br /> Modesto California Results of the laboratory analyses are discussed in Section 3 3 <br /> 32 LABORATORY ANALYTICAL INIFTHOD01 O(:Y <br /> I he analvtlLal mLthods and dLtLLtion limits for the laboratory analyses of thL water Samples LolleLted during the <br /> JUIlL 21 2000 0I oundwater monitoring, evLnt an, Su[nmarl/Ld In I ablL I <br /> TABL14. 1 <br /> ILaboratory Analytical Metbods <br /> Analytes <br /> BTFX TPH-G Gasoline Oxygenates/Additives <br /> Anal)ttLal Method 602 5030/I (,FT 8260B <br /> Detection I lmlt 0 3 Itg/L (BTF) 0 05 mg/L 1 0 Itg/L <br /> 0 6 gg/1 (X) 10 0 ftg/L (tert Butanol) <br /> mg/l milllgiams pe.r]nLr{parts ptr million) µg/L micrograms pLr liter(parts per billion) <br /> BTI X ben/etie toluene ethyl bLn/LnL and total xylcnLS <br /> T P11-6 =total pt troleum hydrocarbons quantified as gasoline <br /> (,asolule Oxyguiates/Additives mLthyl tertiary butyl ether(MTB);) -thanol tertiary-butanol <br /> di-r5opropvl ether(DIFF) Lthyl tertiary-huts] ether(FTBL)and tertiary amyl methyl ether(TAMI ) <br /> 3 3 LABORATORY ANALYTICAL RESULTS <br /> None of the analytes of interest were detected at or above the laboratory reported detection Itmtts in the <br /> groundwater sample collected from NIW-I BTI-X MTBE and TPH-G were detected in the groundwater sample <br /> collected from MW-2 at concentrations of 70 micrograms per liter (pg/l), 6 6 µg/l, 1 0 µg/l 9 4 µg/l, 120,000 <br /> µg/l and 0 07 Inilligrains pLr liter (mall), respectively MTBF was detected in the groundwater sample collected <br /> from MW-3 at a concentration of 8 800 lig/1 The laboratory reported detection limits associated with the <br /> gasoline oxygenates/additives were raised for the samples collected from MW-2 and MW-3 BLnzeethyl <br /> L� <br /> CONDOR <br />