Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> CreolagccalTecls�ucslnc Page 6 <br /> 2'd Quarter 2004 Groundwater Monitoring Report <br /> Project No 507 2 <br /> August 30,2004 <br /> 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMNMNDATIONS <br /> ' Conclusions <br /> 1 Elevated concentrations of BTEX, TPH-G and MTBE are present in a laterally limited <br /> groundwater plume that is centered on MW-9 <br /> ' 2 The MTBE and previously monitored 1,2-DCA plumes are insignificant in comparison to <br /> the BTEX and TPH-G plumes <br /> 3 The lateral extent of the contamination plume is defined to the southeast, northeast and <br /> ' east by wells MW-1, MW-2 and MW-3 respectively <br /> 4 The TPH-G plume is defined to the southwest and northwest by wells MW-7 and MW-10 <br /> respectively <br /> ' 5 The BTEX/TPH-G groundwater contamination plume is defined by MW-109 in the <br /> vertical plane, which is screened 40 feet below MW-9 This suggests that the vertical <br /> gradient is not moving the contaminants to any degree <br /> 6 The groundwater gradient flows to the northeast or east with relatively flat slopes, which <br /> appears not to significantly influence contaminant migration <br /> 7 The site exhibits a predominantly downward component of vertical groundwater flow, <br /> which is approximately the same slope as the horizontal gradient These components of <br /> groundwater flow appear not to cause preferential contaminant migration <br /> 8 The groundwater contaminant concentrations have decreased in the core plume (well <br /> MW-9) but this is indicative of the infection pilot test started on March 19, 2004 The <br /> center of the plume has not migrated beyond the source area giving evidence that the <br /> ' plume is not migrating laterally or vertically by advective flow <br /> 9 The data shows that the plume is stable and is not being degraded by natural <br /> biodegradation causes <br /> Recommendations <br /> • Maintain the modified quarterly monitoring schedule <br /> t • A work plan for "In Situ Remediation Feasibility Study" dated September 20, 2002 and <br /> an addendum to the plan were submitted to San Joaquin County Environmental Health <br /> Department(SIC EHD) SIC EHD approved the study in their March 20, 2003 letter and <br />' requested a detailed work plan for evaluation GTI submitted our June 10, 2003 "In-Situ <br /> Remediation Pilot Test" work plan for an in-situ hydrogen peroxide infection pilot <br /> project and SJC EHD issued approval of the work plan in their September 10, 2003 <br />' letter The installation of three, 3/4" diameter monitoring wells was completed on <br /> February 5, 2004 and the infections began in mid March 2004 A brief status update is <br />' included in the following section We recommend that monthly field measurements be <br /> made of the DO & ORP in MW-9 for the next three months to track the concentrations <br /> of these two factors after the pilot test was completed <br />