Laserfiche WebLink
presented in Appendix D. The purged water was contained in a <br /> labeled, secured 55 gallon drum on site. From the well <br /> information a ground water contour surface was plotted and a 'flow <br /> direction inferred. This is presented in , Figure 4B. <br /> The wells were allowed to recover after purging. A water sample <br /> was then collected with a fresh bailer. Each sample was divided <br />{ among four 40-m1 VOA vials . The vials are supplied by the <br /> laboratory or a chemical supply company and are pre--cleaned to <br /> exact EPA protocols . The sample vials were labeled as to <br /> station, well, time, and sampler, and documented on the chain-of- <br /> custody sheet; they were then placed into an ice chest and cooled <br /> to 40C with ice . The samples were delivered to a California <br /> State Certified Laboratory and signed over to the lab using <br /> standard chain-of-custody procedures . <br /> CHEMICAL ANALYSIS RESULTS <br /> The samples were analyzed at Matrix Environmental Laboratories <br /> (DHS #1676) for Total Fuel Hydrocarbons (gasoline) with BTEX <br /> distinction, utilizing EPA Methods 5030 and 602 , respectively. <br /> As noted under Purpose and Scope above, water`\ samples were <br /> collected from MW1, MW2, MW3 , MW4, MW5, MW6, MW7 and MW8 . Of <br /> these laboratory analyzed samples, all samples were Below <br /> Reportable Limits (SRL) except MW8 . The analytical results and <br /> the pertinent gathering data are listed in Table 1, and the <br /> laboratory report is included in Appendix :E. <br /> HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION <br /> The wells sampled during this monitor round indicate non detect <br /> for petroleum hydrocarbons for all wells except MW8 , which <br /> indicated low levels of TFH ( .21 ppm) and Benzene (450 ppb) . it <br /> is unclear, with the limited samples available, what effect the <br /> partial recharge of the ground water table in this area has 'had <br /> upon natural bio-degradation taking place at the site . While the <br /> overall ground water gradient remains low; with a slope of . 0024, <br /> it has decreased slightly (from . 0038 in December 18, 1992) with <br /> a increase of approximately 3 feet in ground water elevation. The <br /> aquifer test data along with the lithologic cross section and <br /> hydraulic gradient (Problem Assessment Report, December 5, 1989) <br /> across the site infer that velocities of the ground water are <br /> such that natural bio-degradation is taking place . <br /> A <br /> j The restoration of a sampling point at MW4, which lies along the <br /> dip of the ground water gradient between MW3 and MW6, enhances <br /> detection and/or verification of contamination. <br /> 1 <br /> t <br />