Laserfiche WebLink
v <br />Water Quality Monitoring Report <br />Forward Landfill <br />Table 2-1 summarizes site monitoring parameters, analytical methods, and monitoring <br />frequency. Water quality samples were also analyzed in the field for oxygen reduction <br />potential (ORP), turbidity, temperature, specific conductance, and pH and recorded on <br />well data sheets. The groundwater monitoring wells and leachate monitoring points <br />were sampled in accordance with the sampling and analysis plan detailed in Appendix B. <br />The well data sheets, laboratory data, certificates of analyses, and chain -of -custody <br />records for the sampling program are included in Appendix C. The laboratory analyses <br />and field results for groundwater monitoring wells, surface water stations, lysimeter and <br />leachate sampling stations are summarized in Tables 2-2 through 2-6 and cumulative <br />tabulated data for all monitoring points and constituents for groundwater, unsaturated <br />zone, leachate, and surface water are presented in Appendix C. <br />2.1.2 QA/QC Results <br />The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program completed for the second <br />quarter 2014 water quality monitoring event included analyses of two trip blanks, one <br />field blank, one equipment blank, laboratory method blanks, and one duplicate sample <br />(MW -23R). The trip, field, and equipment blanks were analyzed for volatile organic <br />compounds (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 <br />indicate that carbon disulfide was measured in field, trip, and equipment blanks at trace <br />concentrations ranging from 0.62 µg/L to 0.71 µg/L. Accordingly, carbon disulfide has <br />been flagged as a field/laboratory contaminant on Table 2-2. Inorganic constituents <br />including chloride, sulfate, magnesium, and potassium were measured at trace <br />concentrations in method blanks analyzed with groundwater samples. However, these <br />constituents were measured at very low concentrations that did not affect the <br />interpretation of primary sample results. The results of the duplicate sample collected <br />from well MW -23R yielded very good correlation with a relative percent difference <br />(RPD) of less than five percent. Review of the sampling dates and laboratory analytical <br />certificates indicates that all laboratory analyses were completed within required <br />holding times. Based on the results of the laboratory QA/QC analyses, it is concluded <br />that the laboratory data generated for the second quarter 2014 monitoring period are <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 <br />on a Well Data Sheet (Appendix C). The groundwater elevations were calculated for <br />each well by subtracting the depth -to -water measurement from the top -of -casing <br />reference elevation. The current groundwater elevation data for the Forward Unit is <br />summarized in Table 2-3. <br />M:\ 2014.0012\FA_2Q14.docx S <br />7/29/2014, Rev. 0 <br />