ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005142 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Jim Woodard July 20, 1994 Page 3 clarity (turbidity). The wells were considered developed when the temperature, pH, and specific conductance of the extracted water did not vary by more than 10 percent between three consecutive readings. Monitoring well MW-3 could not be developed on May 12 due to equipment failure; instead, monitoring well MW-3 was developed on May 17. Prior to sampling MW-I and MW-2 and developing MW-3 on May 17, 1994, static water levels were collected from each well. Monitoring well MW-3 was developed following the procedures described above. Once the development was complete, the field technician collected a sample from the well. The field technician then began purging monitoring wells MW-1 and MW-2 using a portable, submersible pump. The wells were purged and monitored for the parameters described above. Once the parameters had stabilized, and a minimum of three standing volumes had been purged from each well, samples were collected using a disposable polyethylene bailer connected to clean polyethylene rope. The sample was transferred from the bailer to the appropriate laboratory-prepared sampling bottles and immediately placed in a cooler containing crushed ice. Nondisposable sampling equipment was decontaminated before use and between each well by washing with a non-phosphate soap solution, rinsing once with tap water, and rinsing a second time with deionized water. Well development and purging information is summarized in Table 1 and static water levels are summarized in Table 2. Results and Discussion Static water levels collected on May 17 indicate the groundwater is flowing to the north- northwest under a gradient of approximately 0.01 feet per foot. Resulting groundwater elevations and groundwater flow directions for the May 17, 1994, data are presented on Figure 2. Samples were submitted to Western Environmental and Scientific, a State of California certified laboratory, under appropriate chain-of-custody protocol. Samples were analyzed for the presence of total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg), diesel fuel (TPHd), motor oil (TPHmo), and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene isomers (BTEX) using EPA Methods 8015 modified and 8020. With the exception of TPHmo, the constituent of concern analyzed by the laboratory was not identified in the three groundwater samples collected on May 17, 1994. TPHmo was identified in the sample collected from monitoring well MW-3 at a concentration of 130 micrograms per liter (pg/1), slightly higher than the analytical method reporting limit of 100 pgll. The laboratory has elaborated on this result by indicating on the data sheet, "Oil range hit may be false positive. No Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction specified at the beginning of this document. 14221REPORTSQTR.R PT