ARCHIVED REPORTS_2012_2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0 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 third quarter 2012 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 oxygen reduction potential (ORP), 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 2-6. The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program completed for the third quarter 2012 water quality monitoring event included analyses of two field blanks, one trip blank, two laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample. The field and trip 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 two VOCs (chloromethane and styrene) were detected at estimated trace concentrations in the trip blank during the monitoring period. However, review of the primary sample results indicates that neither of these VOCs were detected in the primary samples collected during the monitoring period. A duplicate sample was collected from wells MW -14 and labeled FMW-Duplicate. With the exception of hexavalent chromium, the duplicate sample analyses yielded good correlation with a relative percent difference of less than 7 percent. Review of the 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 the laboratory data generated for the third quarter 2012 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. iff ZITMI CITIM It 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 groundwater elevation data for the Forward Unit is summarized in IV Table 2-3. C:\2012-0025\FA3Q12.doc 4 Geo -Logic Associates