Laserfiche WebLink
Ms Lori Duncan <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> The waste was stored on site in accordance with 49 CFR part 172 and 40 CFR part 262 Table 1 <br /> summarizes product thickness measurements and product removed Field notes associated with product <br /> bailing, including charts showing the measured product thickness in the well over time and the depth to fluid <br /> thickness to the well over time are included in Attachment 1 <br /> 2.2 Groundwater Monitoring <br /> Water level elevations were monitored in wells MW1 through MW7 on December 8, 2004 The depth to <br /> water and depth to product in well MW3 were measured using an electronic water/hydrocarbon interface <br /> probe Depths to water in other site wells were measured using an electronic water level indicator <br /> Groundwater elevations were calculated by subtracting the measured depth to groundwater in each well <br /> from the respective wellhead elevation The depth to groundwater in the wells on December 8, 2004 ranged <br /> from 26 49 feet below the top of the well casing (btoc) in well MW3 (corrected for the presence of free <br /> product)to 27 48 feet btoc in well MW5 Groundwater flowed in a northeasterly direction with a calculated <br /> gradient of 0 004 feet per foot (approximately 21 feet per mile) A potentiometric surface map for <br /> December 8, 2004 is shown on Figure 2 Groundwater monitoring data are summarized in Table 2 <br /> Monitoring data sheets are included in Attachment 2 <br /> 2 3 Well Purging <br /> An experienced Ground Zero technician purged wells MW 1 through MW7 on December 8, 2004 using <br /> dedicated, disposable bailers The technician purged a minimum of three well casing volumes of water from <br /> each well and measured physical parameters of temperature, pH and electrical conductivity during the <br />. purging process Purging was terminated at each well after the measured parameters stabilized <br /> All downhole equipment was decontaminated between wells by washing with a solution of laboratory-grade <br /> detergent, and then double rinsing with clean rinse water <br /> 24 Groundwater Sampling <br /> Groundwater samples were collected from each well after physical parameters had stabilized and the water <br /> in the well had recovered to pre-purged levels Samples were placed in an ice chest at a temperature of 4° <br /> Centigrade and submitted to Argon Laboratory under chain of custody protocol <br /> The samples were analyzed for the presence of VOCs pursuant to the existing groundwater monitoring and <br /> sampling program Field development/purge logs are included in Attachment 2 <br /> 3 0 GROUNDWATER ANALYTICAL RESULTS <br /> Tetrachloroethene (PCE) was detected in wells MW1, MW2, MW4, MW5, MW6, and MW7 at <br /> concentrations of I l micrograms per liter (gg/L), 10 gg/L, 4 3 gg/L, 3 7 µg/L, 50 pg/L, and 130 gg/L, <br /> respectively No PCE was detected in well MW3 (<40 gg/L) Cis-1,2-Dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE) <br /> ranged from <0 5 gg/L in wells MW2 and MW5 to 24 gg/L in well MW3 Chloroform ranged from 0 9 <br /> gg/L in wells MW5 and MW7 to l 5 gg/L in well MW6, but was not detected in well MW3 (<4 0 gg/L) <br /> Trichloroethene (TCE)was detected only in wells MW6 (1 2 gg/L)and MW7 (3 1 gg/L) <br /> iNo petroleum hydrocarbons or gasoline additives were detected above method detection limits in <br /> groundwater samples collected from any site well, except well MW3 Well MW3 contained benzene at 13 <br /> G\GROLTNDZE\GABBARD\reports\QNM\2004\4QM2004 doc <br />