Laserfiche WebLink
Date October 10,2002 <br /> Quarter 3`d Quarter,2002 <br /> i� <br /> BP QUARTERLY GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT <br /> Facility No 11191 <br /> Address 1469 West Hammer Lane, Stockton, CA <br /> BP Environmental Engineer Scott Hooton <br /> Consulting Co/Contact Person URS/Vernon Elarth <br /> Consultant Project No 38466015 00436 <br /> Primary Agency/Regulatory ID No Margaret Lagorio <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> WORK PERFORMED THIS QUARTER (Third 2002): <br /> 1 Groundwater samples were collected from monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-4 and were submitted for <br /> laboratory analyses <br /> 2 URS compiled and evaluated groundwater monitoring data <br /> WORK PROPOSED FOR NEXT QUARTER (Fourth 2002): <br /> 1 The next groundwater sampling event is tentatively scheduled for November 2002 Groundwater samples will <br /> be collected from monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-4 Groundwater samples will be analyzed for total <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline(TPHg), for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes (BTEX), and <br /> methyl tert-butyl ether(MtBE)using U S Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA)Methods 8015 and 8021 <br /> QUARTERLY RESULTS SUMMARY (Third 2002): <br /> Current Phase of Project Monitoring <br /> Frequency of Groundwater Sampling MW-1 through MW-4 <br /> Frequency of Groundwater Monitoring Quarterly <br /> Sample Date 07/31/02 _ <br /> Is Free Product (FP) Present on Site No <br /> FP Recovered This Quarter NA <br /> Cumulative FP Recovered to Date NA <br /> Approximate Depth to Groundwater 49 4 to 51 2 feet below ground surface <br /> Direction of Groundwater Flow S-SE <br /> Groundwater Gradient 0 005 ft fit <br /> ANALYTICAL DATA REVIEW: <br /> Based on the review of the analytical and hardcopy data (chain-of-custody records, blanks, dilutions, holding times, <br /> LCS/LCSD results,MS/MSD results, and surrogate recoveries),the data are acceptable as reported by the laboratory <br /> with the following exceptions <br /> • Elevated reporting limits were due to dilutions performed by the laboratory in order to quantitate a target <br /> analyte <br /> • In the TPHg and fuel oxygenate analyses of sample MW-3, the reporting limits were elevated due to matrix <br /> interference <br /> • Sample MW-1 was utilized for the MS analyses The percent recoveries for MtBE were not calculated because <br /> the native concentration exceeded four times the spike level Consequently, an assessment of matrix effects <br /> K U5 6P ARCG111I911QuunerW QTR 02511191 GWMR3Q02 doe Page 1 <br />