ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0004018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i L4 Soil and Groundwater Investigation Page 3 Former Dolly Madison Facility Project No 2002-1426-02 October 27, 2000 The CPT method consists of advancing a cone-tipped cylindrical probe (1 7 inches in diameter) into the ground while simultaneously measuring the resistance to penetration The CPT method determines soil lithology by comparing the force (cone bearing pressure) required to advance the probe (Qt) to the friction ratio (Rf) (Rf equals sleeve friction [FS] divided by the probe tip load times the penetration pore pressure [Ud]) A graphical diagram illustrating CPT interpretations of soil types is included in Appendix A Computer generated CPT logs were plotted in the field, providing the field representative a graphical log of subsurface soil lithology The CPT test data report, which includes logs of all CPT data, graphical geologic logs, and additional information on the CPT technique is presented in Appendix A CPT tests were performed in accordance with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Method D3441 Groundwater samples were collected from 67, 82, 101, and 116 feet bgs in CPT-1B-4 and from 40, 85, and 103 feet bgs in CPT-2B-5 using the HydropunchTm technique Water samples were collected by pushing the HydropunchTm sampler approximately 2 feet below the bottom of the borehole, exposing a screen at the desired sampling depth Groundwater was placed in glass bars (vows) containing a hydrochloric acid preservative and samples were placed in an ice-chilled cooler Each sample was appropriately labeled • and identified on a chain-of-custody form Soil samples were collected by driving a California-modified split-spoon sampler equipped with three pre-cleaned 2-inch by 6-inch brass sleeves into undisturbed soil Additional sleeves of soil collected at each sampling interval were field screened for volatile organic compounds using a photoionization detector (PID) The soil samples were also classified using the Unified Soil Classification System The lowermost intact sample was retained for analysis The sample ends were covered with Teflon'M sheets and plastic caps and samples were placed in an ice-chilled cooler Each sample was appropriately labeled and identified on a chain-of-custody form Soil classifications and field screening results are included on the soil sampling Iogs presented in Appendix B Soil samples were collected from 14, 21, 49, 64, 98 and 116 feet bgs in boring CPT-1B-4 and from 15, 37, 65, 82 and 101 feet bgs in boring CPT-2B-5 LABORATORY ANALYSIS Soil and groundwater samples collected during the investigation were submitted to Alpha Analytical, Inc of Sparks, Nevada, a California state-certified analytical laboratory, for chemical analysis The soil and groundwater samples were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHG), using U S Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Method 8015 DHS/LUFT Manual and for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX), methyl tertiary butyl ether (MtBE), ethyl tertiary butyl ether (EtBE), diisopropyl ether (DIPE), tertiary amyl methyl ether [tAME], tertiary butyl alcohol [tBA], 1,2-dichloro ethane (1,2-DCA) and 1,2 dibromoethane (EDB) using USEPA Method 8260B P 1I 8 ClStockton\ReportsVRC Soil and Groundwater report Oct 2000 doe STRATUS