Laserfiche WebLink
Gradient Calculation <br /> Prior to purging the wells and collecting groundwater samples, the <br /> depth to groundwater was measured. Field notes are contained in <br /> Appendix A <br /> The depth to groundwater was measured in the three wells, by an <br /> electronic probe, from the mark located on the top of each casing. <br /> The resulting data is shown in Table 2 <br /> TABLE 2 <br /> Groundwater Elevation measurements - June 10, 1996 in Feet <br /> Well ID Well Elevation Depth to Water Groundwater <br /> Elevation <br /> MW-1 17 07 6 . 41 10. 66 <br /> MW-2 17. 84 7. 86 9. 98 <br /> MW--3 16. 72 4. 77 11. 95 <br /> The calculated gradient is S360E or 1260 at 0 05 ft/ft as shown in <br /> Figure 2 . <br /> Groundwater Sampling <br /> The wells were purged by pumping and collecting the purged <br /> groundwater in 55-gallon drums labeled awaiting analysis. Each of <br /> the wells was um ed to dr ness. The wells were slow in recovering <br /> as they were in the two previous sampling events. This phenomenon <br /> of slow recovery is most likely caused by the silty clay soil at <br /> the screened section of the wells. Well data sheets are contained <br /> in Appendix A. <br /> Groundwater samples, one from each well , was collected by a clean <br /> dedicated bailer, placed in two 40 ml VOAs with Teflon septa, <br /> labeled, held in a cooled (4 Degrees C) ice chest and transported <br /> to a State Certified Laboratory, under CaOC: documentation, for <br /> analyses. The samples from MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3 were collected on <br /> June 10, 1996 . <br /> The groundwater pumped from MW-2 and MW-3/monitoring wells had a <br /> ht h drocarbon odor The groundwater from MW-3 had a slight <br /> sheen. <br /> 4 <br />