My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_2014_2
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
9999
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440005
>
Archived Reports
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_2014_2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/18/2020 12:56:18 PM
Creation date
7/3/2020 10:57:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
2014_2
RECORD_ID
PR0440005
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004516
FACILITY_NAME
FORWARD DISPOSAL SITE
STREET_NUMBER
9999
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
20106001-3, 5
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
9999 AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4433_PR0440005_9999 AUSTIN_2014_2.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
495
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
C] <br />Water Quality Monitoring Report <br />Forward Landfill <br />3.1.2 QA/QC Results <br />The QA/QC program completed for the fourth quarter 2014 water quality monitoring <br />event at the Austin Unit included analyses of two trip blanks, one field blank, laboratory <br />method blanks, and one duplicate sample (well AMW-6). The field and trip blanks were <br />analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8260 and method blanks were analyzed for all <br />required analyses. The results of the QA/QC program indicate that no VOCs were <br />detected in the blank samples. Inorganic constituents including calcium, potassium, <br />sodium, and strontium were measured at trace concentrations in method blanks. <br />However, these constituents were measured at very low concentrations that did not <br />affect the interpretation of primary sample results. Results from the duplicate <br />groundwater sample collected from well AMW-6 are presented along with the primary <br />data in Table 3-1. The duplicate sample analyses yielded good correlation with <br />quantifiable constituents having a RPD less than six percent. Review of laboratory <br />analysis dates and required holding times indicates that all samples were submitted and <br />analyzed within the required holding times during the fourth quarter 2014. Based on <br />the results of the laboratory blank and duplicate analyses, it is concluded that <br />acceptable QA/QC procedures were exercised and the water quality samples collected <br />from the Austin Unit appear to be representative of water quality at the site. <br />3.1.3 Groundwater Elevations and Contours <br />Prior to purging and sampling, each well was sounded for water depth using a weighted <br />electronic sounder, and the static water level was recorded on a well data sheet <br />(Appendix F). The groundwater elevations were calculated for each well by subtracting <br />the depth -to -water measurement from the top -of -casing reference elevation. The <br />current groundwater elevation data for the Austin Unit are summarized in Table 3-6. <br />The groundwater elevation data obtained during this quarterly monitoring period were <br />used to generate the groundwater elevation contour map shown on Figure 3-1, which <br />indicates that groundwater flows in a northeast direction with a hydraulic gradient <br />varying from of 0.001 to 0.003 ft/ft with a slight groundwater mound in the vicinity of <br />the groundwater treatment facility (GTF) infiltration pond north of the Austin Unit. <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 />Ki cm 0.003 sec — fit <br />V = — _ [( 0.04 —) * ] * 2835 ;z 0.972 ft / day <br />ne sec 0.35 cm — day <br />M:\ 2014.0012\FA_4Q14.docx 10 <br />1/28/2015, Rev. 0 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.