Laserfiche WebLink
LEVIN E•FRICKE <br /> collected t <br /> wo and each sample was submitted for analysis. in the <br /> field <br /> Sampling equipment was washed with laboratory grade detergent <br /> ns. Hand <br /> and rinse- im nta wasawashedtusing thelsameo <br /> auguring qu pP method between <br /> borehole locations. <br /> Anal tical Methods. The1313 soil sampls were SState-cert fiedulaboratory <br /> Brown and Caldwell Anal mitted to <br /> ical, <br /> located in Emeryville, California. The samples were analyzed <br /> for arsenic, copper, and Ph. Arsenic and copper an <br /> were <br /> performed using atomic absorption method (EPA Methods les0 was <br /> and <br /> am <br /> 7210, respectively) . The pH of the soil sp <br /> determined using standard wet chemistry methods (EPA Method <br /> 9045) . <br /> In addition, two soil samples were analyzed for copper using <br /> the California Waste Extraction Test Procedure (WET) , (DOHS <br /> test method) . The WET uses a citric acid extraction and is <br /> lated waste should .be <br /> used to determine if a <br /> CaliforniaCopper is not uregu regulated as hazardous <br /> classified as hazardous. <br /> by the EPA. In general, this test determines the leachability <br /> of copper in the soil sample. <br /> ANALYTICAL RESULTS <br /> ts <br /> f the <br /> This section present ro ect the analyticalThe resultslareosummarizedlin <br /> collected for this p Figure 3 . Laboratory data sheets are <br /> Table 1 and presented on <br /> included in Appendix A. <br /> Arsenic. Soil samples collected for this investigationnging fto <br /> contained total arsenic atconc The ahighesttions a concentration of <br /> 40 parts per million (Ppm) - <br /> arsenic (40 ppm) was detected in sample #8 (0.75 to 1.25 feet <br /> below grade) . <br /> Copper. Soil samples collected for this investigation <br /> ns of copper ranging from 36 to 660 ppm- <br /> contained conentratio <br /> clow grade) contained 380 <br /> Soil sample c (0.75 to 1. 25 feet be <br /> ppm copper and soilfeet below grade) <br /> sample B1 (1.0 to 1.5 <br /> contained 660 ppm copper. The concentrations for these two <br /> samples appeared elevated relative to the copper results for <br /> es were <br /> the other 11 soil samples. Therefore, these <br /> r es Results of the WET <br /> submitted for the WET analyses for copper.at 15 and 17 ppm for <br /> analyses were concentrations of cograde) , and Bl (1. 0 to 1. 5 <br /> sample #7 (0.75 to 1. 25 feet below g <br /> feet below grade) , respectively. <br /> 2 <br />