WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

) U �AR Allow lechsloolvan aa°;'kfiFf eS AP712016 this well was conuminant-f. Small sampling equipment was rinsed lightly with daionized water. The rinse water was conlainN in a card Twelve equipment IdarSs (B-EGSA-30C through B-EGSA-3038) were collected prior m avocation equipment downhole in each subsequent horehole and arudyzmd to demmdne the clecfiVeness of dm decontamination process. All equipment blanks were analyzed for SVOCs/PAHs utilizing EPA Method 625 and for PCBs utilizing EPA Method 8082A. As shown in Table 2, SVOCOPAHs and PCBs were not detected in any 4doc 12 Natural blanks at concentrations shove analytical nwthod reporting limim� Sampling of the dxommt ra ter (in the dm) was inadvertently rim discussed 'mmediawly aver the c+nclusiont'a then characterization field was. I[ iseslimatNhM1atOre55- gallon drum was half full or less, therefore contained approximately 20 gallons of water or loss. By the Bare this oversight was discovered, the water in the drum had ernporamal. Given flue (1) no SVOCsIPAHs were detected in the soil from the boreholes, (2) only very low levels of PCBs (below regulate" screening levels) were detected In a few mil samples, and (3) the drams were located in an area where ro frequent activity scroll, the evaporation of water from these drums did not likely pose a threat to human health or the environment. When nine wells located in the vicinity of the debris burial trenches were sampled for PCB analysis in December 2014, the samples were collected with an existing downhole pump or disposable e0on bailer. The only equipment requiring decontamination was the water level probe that was decontaminated prior to placement into each well. 3.4, Laboratory Analysis Soil samples were handled and transported to an ollsite analytical laboratory in sectarianism with the procedures specified in the LLNL SOPS related to sample handling and management. A total of 35 subsurface soil samples and three QC duplicate samples were analyzed for SVOCoVPAHs utilizing EPA Mahar 9270: stanivolatile organic compounds by gas chromatography (GC) — mass specmuccum (MSL The wooks of the SVOCIPAI I analysis of the unique and QC duplicate subsurface soil samples are presented in Table 3 and discussed in Section 4.l. A total of 35 subsurface soil samples and three QC duplicate samples were analyzed for PCBs utilizing EPA Method 8082C (PCBs by GC). The results of the PCB analysis of the sense and QC duplicate subsurface mil samples are presented in Table 4 and discussed in Section 4.2.1 . Soil sample analyses for SVOCs/PAHs, and PCBs were perforated by Clubs and Tompkins laboratories. Inter-laboratory QC samples were submitted to BC Laboratories for analysis. A total of 11 ground water samples (including two duplicate samples) were analyzed for PCBs utilizing EPA Medical 8o82A. Ground water sample analyses for PCBs were perfmmed by BC Laboratories Bakersfield CA). The results of the PCB analysis of the normal and QC duplicate ground water samples are presented in Table 5 and discussed in Section 4.2.2. Sample preparation and analysis conducted by the analytical labor&arias followed QA/QC requ te specified in the Livermore Site and Shalom QAPP (Dibley, 1999, Section 2, pp. 15-25)n The contract analytical laboratories (BC Laboratories and Curtis and "Tompkins Laboratories) used methods and procedures functionally equivalent to the methods add precedence defined in the EPA Contract Laboratory Progrem and the California DISC Credited