Laserfiche WebLink
CLOSURE REQUEST 5-31-94 <br /> used for the project had the following detection <br /> limits, unless a dilution was used, which would <br /> increase the detection limit value: <br /> Soil (ppm) Water (ppb) <br /> (1989) LATER (1989) LATER <br /> TPHg <10 <1 <500 <50 <br /> TPHd <10 <10 <500 <50 <br /> Benzene <0 . 005 <0 . 005 <0 . 3 <0 . 5 <br /> Toluene <0 . 005 <0 . 005 <0 .3 <0 . 5 <br /> Ethylbenzene <0 . 005 <0 . 005 <0 .3 <0 . 5 <br /> Xylene isomers <0 . 015 <0 . 005 <0 . 9 <0 . 5 <br /> 3 . Were the appropriate laboratory analyses used (see Table <br /> - 2) . Yes . <br /> The laboratories used EPA method 8020 for BTEX and <br /> Volatile Hydrocarbons as gasoline (GCFID 5030) and EPA <br /> method 8015 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (gasoline, <br /> kerosine, diesel and oil) for both soil and water. They <br /> also used the LUFT method for diesel an soil . <br /> Total lead in water and soil : EPA method 7420 <br /> Organic lead and EDB in soil : DHS method <br /> i <br /> 4 . Were the laboratory analysis and QA/QC results <br /> submitted? Yes . <br /> In cases of high water table a <br /> 5 . g ) were samples taken from <br /> the sidewalls and b) was water present in the excavation <br /> pit? a) No b) No. Ground water initially found <br /> to be 47 feet below the surface. <br /> 6 . Were soil samples taken for every 20 linear feet of <br /> underground piping? Yes . <br /> Initial sampling occurred at the direction of Ms . Carol <br /> Oz of San Joaquin County Health and a sample was <br /> obtained that represented approximately 20 linear feet <br /> of underground piping. Later the area of the former <br /> product lanes and dispensing area was over-excavated <br /> with samples being obtained at various depths of the <br /> excavation to document, see Figures 7A. . 7D. <br /> 7 . Were depth and location of soil samples submitted? Yes . <br /> See Figures 3A, 3B, and 5B and Table 4 . <br /> page29 <br />