Laserfiche WebLink
could be affected by dry bulk handling and other industrial operations, which are <br />prevalent among nearby facilities and operations in this case. An equipment <br />blank sample was also taken in the field by running a volume of DI water through <br />the equipment. <br />Groundwater Conditions <br />Groundwater occurred at varying depths (see Table 1 and Appendix A). A <br />groundwater flow direction was plotted from the monitoring well data and showed <br />a low flow gradient with a flow direction to the south-southeast (see Figure 2). A <br />lined pond full of water next to Well MW-2 appears to create a localized <br />groundwater mound that could account for the shallower depth to groundwater <br />and locally steep gradient in that well's vicinity. In general the flow gradient is <br />relatively flat over the majority of the Parcels 2 and 3 at about 0.002. <br />The monitoring wells have apparently not been measured for water levels or <br />sampled since 1991. Water levels in 1991 appeared to be about three feet <br />deeper than at the most recent measurement (June 2003). Dames and Moore <br />plotted a southeasterly flow direction in 1991 and our data are in general <br />agreement with the overall flow direction. <br />Laboratory Chemical Analysis <br />Four sets of groundwater samples were analyzed at Precision Environ-tech <br />(PET) analytical Laboratory an Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program <br />(ELAP), State certified analytical laboratory. These samples were analyzed for <br />the following: <br />Semi-volatile Compounds: EPA Method 8260 <br />PH: EPA Method 160.1Specific <br />Conductance: EPA Method 120.1 <br />Total Organic Carbon (TOC): EPA Method 415.1 <br />Total Dissolved Solids (TDS): SM 2540 C <br />Sulfates: EPA Method 300 <br />Sulphur: EPA Method 300 <br />Dissolved Copper (Cu): EPA Method 6010 B <br />Dissolved Nickel (Ni): EPA Method 6010 B <br />Dissolved Vanadium: EPA Method 6010 B <br />All metal samples (Cu, Ni, and V) were properly filtered in the laboratory prior to <br />being analyzed via their respective EPA test methods. The analyses were run on <br />a "normal" turnaround (five- to ten working days). The results are tabulated and <br />presented in Tables 2 and 3 below. In addition, as a measure of its QA/QC <br />procedures, an equipment blank sample was taken by PET in the field and <br />subsequently analyzed and the results were all ND (see Appendix B). <br />6