ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005383 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• The volume of water in gallons standing in the well was calculated by subtracting the depth-to-groundwater measurement from the known depth to the well bottom and multiplying by the cross-sectional inside area of the well casing. • A transparent single-List disposable bailer was lowered approximately hall=way into the surface of the water standing in the well and then withdrawn to check for a petrolcuill layer or sheen on the water. • A minimum of three well volumes of water was then purged from each well using a submersible pump. The pump was decontaminated between each well and new tubing was used for each well. • Samples were collected after purging by decanting samples front the disposable disposable bailer directly into bottles provided by the analytical laboratory. Laboratory Analysis The three water samples were relinquished to Sequoia Analytical Laboratories of Sacramento, California for analysis of the following constituents: • TPH-Extractable as Diesel_(Method 8015M) • BTEX and MtBE (Method 8015M/8020) • Oxygenates (Method 8260) The samples were analyzed using a standard laboratory turnaround schedule. FINDINGS No odor, product layer or sheen were observed in the samples from each of the three wells sampled. Groundwater samples were relinquished to Sequoia Analytical Laboratory on July 19, 1998. Analytical results did not detect concentrations of TPI1-purgeable, BTEX/MtBE, or oxygenates above laboratory reporting limits in each of the three water samples submitted for analysts. TPH-extractable as diesel) was reported in the sample from MW-1 at a concentration of 0.0602 mg/L. This concentration was slightly above the reporting limit oi'0.050 mg/L. The remaining two samples contained no detectable extractable hydrocarbons. Copies of the laboratory data sheets along with the laboratory reporting limits is presented ill Appendix B. LIMITATIONS Kleinfelder has prepared this report in accordance with the generally accepted standards of care which exist in southern California at the time of writing. It should be recognized that definition and evaluation of geologic and chemical subsurface conditions are difficult. Judgments leading to conclusions and recommendations are generally made with an incomplete knowledge of the subsurface and/or historic conditions applicable to the site. `l'lie conclusions of this assessment are based on site conditions and design guidelines described by others. More extensive studies may further reduce the uncertainties associated with this assessment. Kleinfelder should be notified for additional consultation if the client wishes to reduce the uncertainties beyond the level associated with this report. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 40320201/4018RO26 Copyright 1998 Kleinfelder,lnc. Ki LINFF:LL7f:K 780 Chadha ill, Ito.1d, ti ilii. !�, I oirfivhl ( A'bl.' �: •I r,' ;i,I 'r .IU:'n t r 'i} il'f •Ili,. rn .