ARCHIVED REPORTS XR0006995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i TABLE B.2 Laboratory Results(Groundwater/Hydropunch- August 1995) I B T E X TPH-G TEPH Detection 03 03 03 06 005 0 05-0 5 Sample I D Limits µg/1 µg/I µg/1 µg/1 mg/l mg/1 ' 1432-TiP1-8/22/95 3 2 14 5 5 26 022 079 (diesel) 1432-HP2-8/22195 04 1 3 ND 87 ND 057 ' (diesel) 1432-HP3-8/22195(4) 260 ND 84 1 36 10 024 (diesel) ' Unit(onversions Analytical µg/l parts per billion(pp) BTEX=benzene toluene ethyl benzene and xylene, ' mg/1 parts ptr million(ppm) TPH-G=total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as gasoline TEPH—total extractable petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as d]ese.l motor oil and KLrosene ND=none detected at or above the reported laboratory detection limas ti=detection limit raised due to gasoline interference ' Based on the results of the August, 1995, investigation, Condor recommended additional investigation be conducted to evaluate the extent of the hydrocarbon plume (reference Soil and Groundwater Investigation ' Report, prepared by Condor, dated September 26, 1995) Mr Ronald Rowe of the PHS/EHD verbally approved the proposal for additional investigation during a telephone conversation with Condor to mid-February, 1996 On August 29, 1996, fivt, Geoprobe boreholes (GP-1 through GP-5) were installed at the site (see the figure attached to the back of Appendix B for borehole locations) Linda Turkette of the PHSIE D was on site to observe the fieldwork Soil and groundwater samples were collected during the investigation for laboratory ' analyses The results of the laboratory analyses indicated that elevated concentrations of TPH-G, BTEX, and M 1BE were detected at GP-4 The TEPH (motor oil range) concentrations detected in soil samples collected from GP-2, CSP-3, and GP-4, are questionable and are likely to be associated with the natural organic content of ' the soil (i e , peat), which is known to produce false positive results (see Tables B 3 and B 4 on the next page) 1 1 1