ARCHIVED REPORTS_2009_14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

have been buried and lysimeters LY-E1A, LY-EIB, LY-E2A, LY-E2B, and WMU D-02 appear to be damaged since they no longer hold a vacuum. A single sample set was collected from each sample point containing sufficient liquid and submitted to BC Laboratories, Inc. (BC) of Bakersfield, California, a state certified laboratory under contract to Forward. During the third quarter 2009 monitoring period, samples were analyzed for the routine monitoring parameters stipulated in RWQCB Order No. R5-2003-0049. Table 2-1 summarizes site monitoring parameters, analytical methods, and monitoring frequency. Water quality samples were also analyzed in the field for dissolved oxygen, turbidity, temperature, specific conductance, and pH and the measured values were recorded on well data sheets. The groundwater monitoring wells and leachate monitoring points were sampled in accordance with the sampling and analysis procedures detailed in Appendix B. The well data sheets,laboratory data, certificates of analyses, and chain-of-custody records for the sampling program are included in Appendix C. The laboratory analyses and field results for groundwater monitoring wells, surface water stations, lysimeter and leachate sampling stations are summarized in Tables 2-2 through 2-7. 2.1.2 QA/QC Results The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)program completed for the third quarter 2009 water quality monitoring event included analyses of four trip blanks, four field blanks, four laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample. The trip, field, and laboratory method blanks were analyzed for volatile organic compounds(VOCs)by EPA Method 8260 and method blanks were analyzed for all of the analytes included in the monitoring program. The results of the QA/QC program indicate that bromoform, chloroform, chloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and methylene chloride were detected in one or more of the QA/QC blanks during the monitoring period. Review of the primary sample results indicates that similar concentrations of bromoform or chloromethane were detected in several of the primary sample collected during the monitoring period and were flagged as suspected laboratory contaminants. During the third quarter 2009 monitoring event, a duplicate sample was collected from well MW-18 and labeled DUP. As shown on Table 2-2, the duplicate sample analyses yielded good correlation(within 10%) with the primary sample results. Review of third quarter 2009 sampling dates and laboratory analytical certificates indicates that all of the laboratory analyses were completed within required holding times. Based on the results of the laboratory QA/QC analyses, it is concluded that generally acceptable QA/QC procedures were exercised and the water quality samples collected from the Forward Unit appear to be representative of water quality at the site. 2.1.3 Groundwater Elevations and Contours Prior to purging and sampling, each well was sounded for water depth using a weighted electronic sounder to an accuracy of 0.01 foot, and the static water level was recorded on a Well Data Sheet(Appendix Q. The groundwater elevations were calculated for each well by subtracting the depth-to-water measurement from the top-of-casing reference D:\2009_001'AFA_3Q09.doc 4 Geologic Associates