Laserfiche WebLink
GeorogicafTechnics Inc. <br /> C&B Equipment Page 3 <br /> Ground water Monitoring Report <br /> Project No. 336.2 <br /> January 13, 1997 <br /> A chain of custody document, listing all samples collected and their intended analyses, <br /> accompanied the samples from field to the laboratory, thereby providing a means to track <br /> their movement and insure their integrity. <br /> 1.3 Laboratory Analyses <br /> The ground water samples collected on December 6, 1996 were delivered to Sherwood Lab <br /> 1_- (Department of Health Services Certification No. 1400), of Hilmar, California, for analysis. <br /> The samples were analyzed using the following methods: <br /> j • method 602 - benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylene (BTEX), and MTBE; <br /> !' • method 8240 -MTBE confirmation (By Entech Analytical Labs,Inc.) <br /> • method m80l5/LLJFT- total volatile hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-G). <br /> = The detection limits for the above analyses are listed in Table 2 of Appendix A and the lab <br /> data is presented in Appendix B. <br /> 2.0 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION <br /> The concentration of gasoline range petroleum hydrocarbons in the ground water near the <br /> r_ point of release has remained fairly consistent, having not varied during the three sampling <br /> E`=f events even one order of magnitude. <br /> I" As with the previous two samplings TPH-Gas and BTEX compounds were detected in MW-1 <br /> <<_� PP <br /> I-�;_ and MW-2. MW-1 did test positive for MTBE, llug/L (Sherwood Labs) and 5.2 ug/L <br /> (Entech Analytical Labs). There is some variance in the results from the two laboratories, <br /> most likely due to the different methods used. However the difference is relatively small. <br /> E-` MW-3 and the domestic well, to the south of MW-2, were non-detect for the above <br /> constituents. <br /> The non-detect in the domestic well provides two valuable pieces of information. <br /> • The plume does not appear to have impacted the domestic well. <br /> • It gives more definition to the lateral limits of the plume. At this time it appears the <br /> plume has not migrated to the south of MW-2 to any great extent. <br /> 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> _:J The following conclusions have been drawn regarding the status of the ground water at this <br /> site and recommendations for future work: <br /> i <br /> 1 r_•� <br /> Jii <br />