My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0009035
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
V
>
VICTOR
>
900
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544434
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0009035
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2019 10:02:19 AM
Creation date
5/8/2019 9:54:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
128
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4.4 Extent of Groundwater Contamination <br /> A total of six groundwater samples have been collected and analyzed (Table 3) Gasoline and diesel <br /> were detected at concentrations of 800 and 8,500 µgfl (parts per billion) in the hydropunch sample <br /> from TT-HP-1, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene were detected at concentrations of 16, 14, and 110 <br /> ppb in this sample Gasoline and diesel were detected at concentrations of 340 and 130,000 ppb in the <br /> sample from the domestic well, but xylene (2 7 ppb) was the only volatile aromatic detected in this <br /> well No free-phase hydrocarbons were detected in this well with the oil-water interface probe during <br /> monitoring on February 20, and the laboratory results confirm that concentrations are below those that <br /> would indicate the presence of free product <br /> None of the other water samples contained any detectable hydrocarbons <br /> Because none of the water samples represent locations that are directly downgradient from DM-1, it <br /> would be premature to attempt to delineate the groundwater plume at this time Therefore, Figure 8 <br /> shows only the hydrocarbon concentrations without any attempt to contour the values or locate the <br /> zero line Based on the present laboratory data, is is probable that contaminated groundwater is present <br /> as far east as OE-2 However, contaminated groundwater does not extend as far east as TT-2 or as far <br /> south as TT-1 <br /> 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> Several conclusions can be drawn from the data collected at this site <br /> 1) The three underground storage tanks that were removed from this site can be ruled out as <br /> potential sources of soil and groundwater contamination All three tanks were in reasonably good <br /> condition when removed, and none of the soil samples collected from beneath them contained <br /> detectable concentrations of hydrocarbons A monitoring well has been installed within 15 feet of the <br /> excavation, and samples collected from the well exhibited no contamination <br /> 2) Hydrocarbon contamination, primarily in the diesel range, was present in soil beneath the <br /> dispenser island to a depth of 25 or 28 feet Most of this soil has been removed, was largely segregated <br /> from clean soil that had been removed from the tank excavation, and remains stockpiled south of the <br /> tank excavation The relatively clean soil has been replaced into the dispenser excavation to create a <br /> drilling location and to diminish the potential for downward percolation of any residual soil <br /> contamination <br /> 3) Diesel contamination is also present to a limited extent in groundwater beneath the dispenser <br /> island The predominance of mid-range hydrocarbons and the absence or low concentrations of <br /> aromatic hydrocarbons indicate either that the petroleum release occurred some considerable time,m <br /> i - <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.