Laserfiche WebLink
Z <br /> e� <br /> w. <br /> I}u Pont NO SN`S[CIllti" <br /> GROUND-WATER MONITORING AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES <br /> F <br /> ! Prior to sampling, the depth to water was measured in all <br /> E ` monitoring wells using an electronic immersion probe. All <br /> measurements were read to the nearest 0.01 foot. If free product <br /> was present, the depth to free product and the depth to water was <br /> measured using an interface probe and an observation sample was <br /> collected with a clear teflon bailer for confirmation. No <br /> analytical samples were collected from monitoring wells containing <br /> � more than 0.25-inch free product. <br /> The monitoring wells were sampled on March 13 and 14, 1989. Prior <br /> to purging, each well was sampled with a clear teflc.-i bailer in <br /> } order to observe the possible presence of floating hydrocarbons. <br /> Purging was accomplished using a stainless steel bailer. The <br /> bailer was thoroughly cleaned prior to each sampling using a <br /> E& trisodium phosphate solution followed by a 10% methylalcohol <br /> solution, and then rinsed with water. The wells were purged prior <br /> ' to sampling until pli and conductivity values stabilized. <br /> Generally, anis resulted in the removal of approximately "3 to 5 <br /> well volumes of ground water from each well process. The water <br /> to obtained from purging was placed in labeled 55-gallon drums and <br /> stored on-site. The bailer line was replaced after each sampling. <br /> t^.a samples recovered from each well. were decanted into two 40-m1 <br /> appropriately labeled, volatile organic analysis (VOA) bottles. <br /> .,3 A duplicate sample was also submitted for quality assurance. The <br /> sample bottles were immediately placed in an ice 'c hest for delivery <br /> f ' to a State of California licensed laboratory. Routine chain-of- <br /> custody procedures were employed. <br /> rzs <br /> f <br /> E <br /> In <br /> A--1 <br />