Laserfiche WebLink
correlation(within 10%) with the primary sample results. Review of second quarter 2010 <br /> sampling dates and laboratory analytical certificates indicates that the laboratory analyses <br /> were completed within required holding times. Based on the results of the laboratory <br /> QA/QC analyses, it is concluded that the laboratory data generated for the second quarter <br /> 2010 monitoring period are generally acceptable and the water quality samples collected <br /> from the Forward Unit appear to be representative of water quality at the site. <br /> 2.1.3 Groundwater Elevations and Contours <br /> Prior to purging and sampling, each well was sounded for water depth using a weighted <br /> electronic sounder to an accuracy of 0.01 foot, and the static water level was recorded on <br /> a Well Data Sheet(Appendix Q. The groundwater elevations were calculated for each <br /> well by subtracting the depth-to-water measurement from the top-of-casing reference <br /> elevation. The current groundwater elevation data for the Forward Unit is summarized in <br /> Table 2-3. <br /> The groundwater elevation data obtained during the second quarter 2010 monitoring <br /> period were used to generate the groundwater elevation contour map shown on Figure <br /> 2-1,which indicates that groundwater generally flows to the northeast towards the Austin <br /> Unit, at an average hydraulic gradient of approximately 0.001 ft/ft. <br /> To calculate the approximate linear groundwater flow velocity for the site, conservative <br /> assumptions were used, including a hydraulic conductivity of 875 gallons per day per <br /> square foot (0.04 cm/sec) and an estimated effective porosity of 35 percent (CH2M Hill <br /> 2000). An estimated groundwater flow velocity was calculated using Darcy's Law: <br /> V = Ki = [(0.04 cm )* 0.001 ]*2835 sec— f1 0.324 ft/day <br /> ne sec 0.35 cm — day <br /> where: V=Groundwater flow velocity. <br /> K=Hydraulic conductivity of the water-bearing unit(0.04 cm/sec). <br /> i=Hydraulic gradient: i;w 0.001 for the site during the second quarter 2010. <br /> ne=Effective porosity(n,=0.35);an estimated value. <br /> The groundwater flow rate is calculated to be 0.324 feet/day(118 feet/year). <br /> 2.1.4 Detection Monitoring Program <br /> Field and laboratory results for the groundwater monitoring wells for the second quarter <br /> 2010 are summarized in Table 2-2. In reviewing the data, several low-level VOCs were <br /> detected. In the sample collected from well MW-10, dichlorodifluoromethane (DCDFM) <br /> and trichlorofluoromethane (TCFM) were measured above the practical quantitation limit <br /> (PQL), and 1,1-dichloroethane (1,1-DCA), cis-l,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE), <br /> tetrachloroethene (PCE), and trichloroethene (TCE)were detected at estimated trace <br /> concentrations (between the method detection limit [MDL] and the PQL). In the sample <br /> collected from well MW-2A, toluene was measured above the PQL, and benzene and <br /> D:\2010_0013\FA_2Q10.doc <br /> 5 Geologic Associates <br />