Laserfiche WebLink
Arm DAMES & MOORE h, <br /> Letter Report <br /> Page two <br /> groundwater sample was collected using a dedicated polyethylene <br /> bailer. The groundwater sample was transferred directly to <br /> laboratory supplied glassware and placed directly in an ice cooler <br /> containing blue ice. The sample was shipped under chain-of-custody <br /> ' to the laboratory within 24 hours from the time of sampling. A <br /> field record of groundwater sampling is presented in Appendix A and <br /> a copy of the chain-of-custody form is presented in Appendix B. <br /> ' No groundwater sample was collected from the existing <br /> production well due to apparent pump failure. The well was <br /> initially turned on and approximately 200 gallons of water was <br /> evacuated from the well. However, following a short shutdown to <br /> ' prepare sampling containers, the pump would not start back up. <br /> LABORATORY ANALYSIS <br /> The groundwater sample collected from well MW-2 was submitted <br /> to Acculab Environmental Laboratory of Petaluma, California. The <br /> sample and a laboratory duplicate were analyzed for the following: <br /> 1. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Gasoline)/BTEX (5030/8015/602 ) <br /> ' 2 . Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (Diesel) ( 3510/8015) <br /> ANALYTICAL RESULTS <br /> Groundwater collected from the downgradient monito ' <br /> MW-2 had no detectable levels of any o he compounds analyzed. <br /> The detection limits for each respective analysis are presented <br /> below. <br /> ' PARAMETER DETECTION LIMIT (ma/11 <br /> ' TPH/Gasoline 0.05 <br /> TPH/Diesel 0 . 30 <br /> ' Benzene 0 .001 <br /> Ethylbenzene 0.001 <br /> Toluene 0.001 <br /> Xylene 0 . 001 <br /> A copy of the complete laboratory results is presented in <br /> Appendix B. <br /> 1 <br />