Laserfiche WebLink
laboratory under contract to Forward. During the second quarter 2013 monitoring period, <br /> samples were analyzed for the routine monitoring parameters stipulated in RWQCB <br /> Order No. R5-2003-0049. Table 2-1 summarizes site monitoring parameters, analytical <br /> methods, and monitoring frequency. Water quality samples were also analyzed in the <br /> field for oxygen reduction potential (ORP), turbidity, temperature, specific conductance, <br /> and pH and recorded on well data sheets. The groundwater monitoring wells and <br /> leachate monitoring points were sampled in accordance with the sampling and analysis <br /> procedures detailed in Appendix B. The well data sheets, laboratory data, certificates of <br /> analyses, and chain-of-custody records for the sampling program are included in <br /> Appendix C. The laboratory analyses and field results for groundwater monitoring wells, <br /> surface water stations, lysimeter and leachate sampling stations are summarized in Tables <br /> 2-2 through 2-7. <br /> QA/QC Results <br /> The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)program completed for the second quarter <br /> 2013 water quality monitoring event included analyses of one field blank, one trip blank, <br /> four laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample. The field and trip blanks were <br /> analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260 and method <br /> blanks were analyzed for all of the analytes included in the monitoring program. The <br /> results of the QA/QC program indicate that no VOCs were detected in blank samples <br /> during the monitoring period. Inorganic constituents including chloride, sodium, <br /> magnesium, and potassium were measured at trace concentrations in method blanks <br /> analyzed with groundwater and surface water samples. These constituents were <br /> measured at very low concentrations that did not affect the interpretation of primary <br /> sample results. The results of the duplicate sample collected from well MW-18 yielded <br /> good correlation with a relative percent difference of less than nine percent. Review of <br /> the sampling dates and laboratory analytical certificates indicates that all laboratory <br /> analyses were completed within required holding times. Based on the results of the <br /> laboratory QA/QC analyses, it is concluded that the laboratory data generated for the <br /> second quarter 2013 monitoring period are generally acceptable and the water quality <br /> samples collected from the Forward Unit appear to be representative of water quality at <br /> the site. <br /> 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 2013 monitoring <br /> period were used to generate the groundwater elevation contour map shown on Figure 2- <br /> 1, which indicates that groundwater generally flows to the north towards the Austin Unit, <br /> C:U013-0021TA_2Q13.doc 4 Geo-Logic Associates <br />