Laserfiche WebLink
Regarding groundwater gradient and flow direction, Figure 3 presents an interpretation of the <br />water level measurement data taken from all monitoring wells and converted to Mean Sea Level <br />(MSL) elevations The groundwater gradient is approximately 0 001 feet per foot which is <br />shallower than previous gradients observed during 1993 The flow direction is generally inward <br />toward the site and to the east While more eastward during this quarter than in the past, the <br />' flow direction is consistent with the east to southeast flow direction observed during most of the <br />previous sampling periods <br />With the flow direction generally east, monitor well MW -3 provided groundwater quality data <br />downgradient from the former tank site for this sample period. While moderate concentrations <br />of benzene and TPH have been seen in this well in the past, neither have been detected during <br />the Iast two quarters which continues to indicate there is no discernable migration from the site <br />Because the depth to groundwater has varied significantly at the site over the history of the <br />project, the relationship of groundwater depth to potential hydrocarbon residues in the soils has <br />been an issue of interest Figure 4 presents a chronology of MSL water levels at monitor well <br />MW -2 Well MW -2 has been selected to represent water levels at the site due to its central <br />location <br />As shown by Figure 4, the groundwater level at the site steadily rose approximately 12 feet from <br />' October 1992 to December 1993 It has currently reached the maximum elevation measured <br />since routine monitoring began As the groundwater levels have been rising, it is important to <br />note that groundwater chemical concentrations have not increased, but rather have continued to <br />decrease This data confirms that it is unlikely that hydrocarbons are bound up in the soils of <br />the previously saturated zone <br />As these trends developed in the past, the data evaluation left open the slight possibility that <br />hydrocarbons may be present but are simply not migrating However, since the most recent data <br />shows no observable chemical concentrations in groundwater and a rising water table with a <br />consistent gradient, the "present but not migrating" scenano has become exceedingly <br />improbable <br />3.0 REMEDIAL PROGRAM STATUS <br />As noted in the "Future Planned Activities" section of the 1st Quarter 1993 Report, continued <br />future quarterly monitoring was anticipated to provide seasonal data on groundwater quality, <br />depth and direction for the purposes of evaluating remedial needs The relationship between <br />groundwater quality and depth is particularly important now that groundwater at the site has <br />risen without producing higher chemical concentrations As concentrations have not increased <br />and, in fact, have decreased to non-detectable concentrations this quarter, the data suggests there <br />are no hydrocarbons remaining to remediate and that the groundwater quality at the site is no <br />longer an environmental issue <br />San Joaquin County EHD has asked that feasibility work be conducted toward development of <br />' a remedial plan for the site by April 25, 1994 Since remediation of the soil has been completed <br />and groundwater sample results currently indicate no hydrocarbon impact to the groundwater, <br />WESTON recommends that EHD consider rescinding the request for a final remedial plan and <br />Proceed with closure of this site <br />S K\RPTSUREC4QTR WP 6 Q3f'-%W <br />