ARCHIVED REPORTS_2011_17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

lysimeters were checked for soil-pore liquid on May 30, 2011, and Del-Tech reported that all lysimeters were dry. Of note, lysimeters LY-EIB, LY-E2B, D-93B, WMU-DOI, WW-D02, WMU-D02 (pan), and FU-03 could not be located or have been buried, while lysimeters LY-EIA and LY-E2A were reported to be plugged. Samples were collected by Del-Tech from each sample point containing sufficient liquid and submitted to BC Laboratories(BC) of Bakersfield, California, a state certified laboratory under contract to Forward. During the second quarter 2011 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 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 second quarter 2011 water quality monitoring event included analyses of two laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample. Of note, one trip blank and two field blanks were also collected during the monitoring event and are reported under the Austin Unit QA/QC results in Section ').1.2. The method blanks were analyzed for all of the analytes included in the monitoring program. The results of the QA/QC program indicate that no VOCs were detected in any of the method blank samples. During the second quarter 2011 monitoring event, a duplicate sample was collected from well W-16 and labeled DUP. As shown on Table 2-2, for quantifiable concentrations greater than the PQL, the duplicate sample analyses yielded good correlation(within 8%) with the primary sample. Review of second quarter 2011 sampling dates and laboratory analytical certificates indicates that the laboratory analyses were completed within required holding times. Based on the results of the laboratory QA/QC analyses, it is concluded that the laboratory data generated for the second quarter 2011 monitoring period are generally acceptable 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 elevation. The current and historical groundwater elevation data for the Forward Unit is summarized in Table 2-3. D:\2011_0050\FA 2QII.docx 4 GeoLogic Associates