REMOVAL_1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r r r r Color Spot, Inc. March 28, 1989 DRAFT (88168A) GD 6 Between 0905 and 1005, the UST was loosened,(40 pounds,'of dry ice placed inside to displace the hydrocarbon vapors, and the UST was connected to a crane for lifting. At 1015, the UST was removed from the ground in the presence of the EHD inspector. The tank did not contain a manufacturer's identification plate, but did appear to be structurally sound. The EHD inspector approved the tank for removal from the property. The tank was to be transported to the JTO yard where it was to be triple rinsed and then broken up for scrap. r After the tank was removed, two small trenches were dug an additional 3 feet (total depth of about 12 feet) into the bottom at the north and south ends r of the excavation (refer to Figure 3 for locations). When each of the trenches were 3 feet deep, an additional backhoe bucket full of soil was removed from each trench and the contract _labora=_y nvironmental Services Corporation) representative collected a disturbed sample., The samples were collected into r precleaned, brass sample sleeves were 2 inches in diameter and 6 inches long. The soil was collected from the surface of the bucket, pushed into the sleeve which was then sealed with aluminum foil, plastic caps, labelled and placed in an ice chest cooled with "blue ice" pending delivery to the laboratory. Chain -of -custody documentation was not observed to have been completed. As the soil samples were being collected, the soils in the backhoe bucket were also monitored with a PID. The soils from the south end of the excavation exhibited r a volatile organic vapor concentration of 1089 ppm and the north end 26 ppm. The samples were collected at about 1145. A composite sample was also collected from the western contaminated soil pile. The soil samples were to be analyzed r for TPH by EPA method 8015, and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes (BTEX) by EPA method 8020. r Following soil sampling, the EHD inspector refused permission for additional soils excavation to remove the contaminated soils. It was the opinion of the inspector, which was concurred with by the SGD representative, that soils contamination appeared to be fairly widespread, both laterally to the southwest, r and vertically. The inspector stated that the EHD would require the submittal of a remedial action plan for review and approval prior to the implementation of additional site work. At 1200, the EHD inspector and laboratory representa- tive departed the site. It was decided by the SGD representative and the yard manager that the excavation was to be kept open, barricaded, and covered with plastic sheeting to keep rain water out. Between 1215 and 1300, the excavation was barricaded and was to be covered with plastic later in the day by Color Spot r personnel. At 1300, the JTO and SGD personnel departed the site. SOIL SAMPLING ANALYTICAL RESULTS The analytical results of the three soil samples collected are ., summarized in Table 1 - Soil Sample Analytical Results, and are presented in Appendix B - Laboratory Analytical Results. r