Laserfiche WebLink
Cleanliness: All sample equipment (i.e., split spoon sampler, brass tubes and teflon <br /> bailer, auger, bit and drilling rods) were thoroughly steamed cleaned before being <br /> used in the first hole and between uses. <br /> Monitoring Well: Three monitoring wells were installed. Each well was constructed of 2 <br /> inch PVC pipe, factory slotted (.02 inch) from 15 to 10 feet with blank casing from <br /> 10 feet to the surface. The well was packed with 43 sand from 15 to 8 feet and has <br /> an annular seal composed of bentonite grout above the packing. Each monitoring,well <br /> was secured with a locking cap and water tight well box. A schematic of monitoring <br /> well construction is shown in f=igure 3. <br /> Water Depth: Depth to lop of ground water was measured with a Solinst water level <br /> .; meter. Solinst snakes a very high quality water meter with stretch resistant <br /> stainless steel cabled tape. Length is marked in feet and tens of feet(marks every i <br /> 1/20 feet). <br /> Chain of Custody: Soil and groundwater samples were collected by Dave Meade, Dr. <br /> Kablanow delivered the samples to California Water Labs and turned them over to <br /> Linda French. Ms. French is the sample status personnel for the lab. Chain of ' <br /> tA <br /> custody forms are kept on file at Geological Technics. Samples that were not analyzed <br /> are kept refrigerated at Geological Technics. <br /> Laboratory Analysis: Five soil samples were analyzed in the lab for gasoline, benzene, <br /> toluene,and xylene. Head space analysis was done on these five using both a gas <br /> s R- chromatograph and flame ionization detector(GC/FiD). One soil sample was also <br /> analyzed for total lead. Fifteen ground water samples were analyzed for gasoline <br /> (using head space, method 506) and purgeable aromatic hydrocarbons (using EPA <br /> I method 602). This data is summarized in Table 1 & 2 and the individual sample data <br /> w sheets are given in Appendix S. <br /> f <br /> Detection.Limits of Analysis: For purgeable aromatics (method 602), the detection <br /> litnit Is 0.5 parts per billion (ppm; recorded as ug/L). For gasoline, the detection <br /> ' limit is 1 ppm (mg/kg) in both soil and water. Detection limit for total lead is 0.01 <br /> ppm (mg/L) <br /> Data Reduction: Geological observations (i.e., boring logs, sediment description and <br /> distribution) were carefully interpreted and stratigraphic cross sections were draw. <br /> These cross sections and the contour maps are the basis for interpreting the <br /> ,�j distribution of soil contamination. Soil contamination data was correlated to the <br /> discoloration of the sediments caused by the microbial degradation of the gasoline, <br /> which Is shown on the cross sections. Soil and ground water contamination are <br /> contoured in plan view. <br /> 5 <br />