Laserfiche WebLink
WMW-D02, WMU-D02 (pan), and FU -03 could not be located or have been buried, <br />while lysimeters LY -EIA and LY-E2A were reported to be plugged. <br />Samples were collected by Del -Tech from each sample point containing sufficient liquid <br />and submitted to BC Laboratories (BC) of Bakersfield, California, a state certified <br />laboratory under contract to Forward. During the third quarter 2011 monitoring period, <br />samples were analyzed for the routine monitoring parameters stipulated in RWQCB <br />Order No. R5-2003-0049. Table 2-1 summarizes site monitoring parameters, analytical <br />methods, and monitoring frequency. Water quality samples were also analyzed in the <br />field for dissolved oxygen, turbidity, temperature, specific conductance, and pH and <br />recorded on well data sheets. The groundwater monitoring wells and leachate monitoring <br />points were sampled in accordance with the sampling and analysis procedures detailed in <br />Appendix B. The well data sheets, laboratory data, certificates of analyses, and chain -of - <br />custody records for the sampling program are included in Appendix C. The laboratory <br />analyses and field results for groundwater monitoring wells, surface water stations, <br />lysimeter and leachate sampling stations are summarized in Tables 2-2 through 2-7. <br />The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program completed for the third quarter <br />2011 water quality monitoring event included analyses of one trip blank, one field blank, <br />three laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample. The trip and field blanks were <br />analyzed for VOCs by EPA Method 8260 and method blanks were analyzed for all of the <br />analytes included in the monitoring program. The results of the QA/QC program indicate <br />that no VOCs were detected in any of the QA/QC blank samples. During the third <br />quarter 2011 monitoring event, a duplicate sample was collected from well MW -17 and <br />labeled DUP. As shown on Table 2-2, for quantifiable concentrations (greater than the <br />PQL), the duplicate sample analyses yielded good correlation (within 6%) with the <br />primary sample. Review of third quarter 2011 sampling dates and laboratory analytical <br />certificates indicates that the laboratory analyses were completed within required holding <br />times. Based on the results of the laboratory QA/QC analyses, it is concluded that the <br />laboratory data generated for the third quarter 2011 monitoring period are generally <br />acceptable and the water quality samples collected from the Forward Unit appear to be <br />representative of water quality at the site. <br />2.1.3 Groundwater Elevations and Contours <br />Prior to purging and sampling, each well was sounded for water depth using a weighted <br />electronic sounder to an accuracy of 0.01 foot, and the static water level was recorded on <br />a Well Data Sheet (Appendix C). The groundwater elevations were calculated for each <br />well by subtracting the depth -to -water measurement from the top -of -casing reference <br />elevation. The current and historical groundwater elevation data for the Forward Unit is <br />summarized in Table 2-3. <br />The groundwater elevation data obtained during the third quarter 2011 monitoring period <br />were used to generate the groundwater elevation contour map shown on Figure 2-1, <br />C:12011-0050\FA_3QIl.docx 4 Geo -Logic Associates <br />