ARCHIVED REPORTS_MONITORING WELLS INSPECTIONS, REPAIR AND REDEVELOPMENT REPORT

Home Browse Search

I Analytical Laboratory) for total sulphur analysis. The alternate laboratory reported similar total sulphur results. They are: Sample No. Enseco result D & M Labs result MW-113/0.5 691 mg/Kg 737 mg/Kg MW-IA/10.0 202 mg/Kg 162 mg/Kg MW-113/10.0 191 mg/Kg 187 mg/Kg "9 J The similarity in total sulphur analysis from the two laboratories suggested a potential problem q with the sulfate analysis. However, D&M Laboratories confirmed the validity of the sulfate analysis and in memorandum offered the following reasons for the incompatibility of the results: • There presently is no EPA-validated method for analyzing sulphur, and the efficiency of EPA 6010, an ICP/AES method, is unknown. There is a possibility that sulphur does not digest well by preparation method EPA 3050, which is used for soils. The sulfate method, EPA 300.0, is EPA validated for water, and a leachate is prepared for soil. This method probably recovers sulfate well; • The sample may not be homogenous, which would cause very different results to occur _1 from different aliquots taken. 70 A copy of D&M Laboratories memorandum is included in Appendix C. _■+ 4.3 GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION i Groundwater beneath Parcel III was sampled in two monitoring wells. Monitoring well MW-1 is located near the northeastern corner of Parcel III, north of the petroleum coke stockpile. Monitoring well MW-4 is located just inside the southeast corner of Parcel III (Figure 2). Groundwater samples collected from these wells were analyzed for: • CAM metals - TTLC - EPA 6010; • Chlorinated Pesticides and PCBs - EPA 608; • Organophosphate Pesticides - EPA 614; I • Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH) - EPA 418.1; • Purgeable Halocarbons - EPA 601; • Purgeable Aromatic Halocarbons - EPA 602; _ • Elemental Sulphur - EPA 6010; SAC28.013 December20, 1991 '� 16