Laserfiche WebLink
e <br /> raw+utrs oesr3[uoasutums <br /> • Table 3-1 <br />' Groundwater Parameter, Depth, and Elevation Data <br /> Top of <br /> Conduc- Casing Depth to I November 2000 <br /> Temp tivity Elevation (ft Water Water Elevation(ft <br /> Well °C H MHOS) MSL ft MSL <br /> MW-2 220 658 2,440 NM 2726 NM <br />' MW-2A 220 697 1,760 1191 2743 -1552 <br /> MW-3A 204 7 16 2,530 1123 2686 -1563 <br /> MW4 21 2 7 73 1,400 13 46 28 39 -1499 <br />' MW-5 209 7 34 878 12 83 2628 -1345 <br /> MW-6 222 706 1,640 13 17 2727 1 -14 10 <br />' MW-7 21 2 7 19 1,650 13 14 2903 -15 89 <br /> MW-8 NM NM NM 1376 2945 -1569 <br /> LMW-9 21 6 7 31 2,610 1226 27 82 -15 S6 <br /> Note NM = Not Measured <br /> A potentiometric contour map developed from the water level data is presented on Figure 3-1. <br /> As in previous sampling rounds groundwater flow is generally toward the north-northeast within <br /> a trough The horizontal groundwater gradient down the center of the trough was 0 00024 ft/ft <br />' The groundwater elevation measured ;n MW-9 was 0 04 feet lower than in MW-2A. This <br /> difference is within the margin of error of the water level measuring instrument Furthermore, <br /> MW-9 may be closer to the center of the trough than MW-2A, which would explain the lower <br /> groundwater elevation in MW-9 <br />' 3.2 ANALYTICAL RESULTS <br />' A summary of the analytical data for the November 2000 groundwater sampling is presented in <br /> Table 3-2 Historical groundwater analytical results are presented in Table A-1 in Appendix A <br />' The analytical reports and Cham of Custody forms are presented In Appendix C <br /> Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in samples collected from MW-2, MW-2A, MW-3A,NM- <br /> 6, MW-7 and MW-9 TPH-g was detected in upgradient monitor well MW-9 for the first time <br /> since the well was installed. There are several possible explanations for this: <br /> NCAShandTROJECTS\SAN10QU1SA14QMRPr WPB 4 <br />