Laserfiche WebLink
soil and in relatively close proximity to the former USTs location and contamination no longer <br /> appears in MW-3 <br /> • <br />' The former diesel USTs caused moderate contamination of the soil and groundwater adjacent to <br /> the tanks Diesel contamination was detected in MW-2 (northeast of MW-1) and MW-3 <br />' (southeast of MW-1) in April 2000 This was not evident in Iater samples until December 2001 <br /> when contamination was detected again in MW-2 Diesel contamination in MW 1 and MW-4 <br />' was also found, indicating that diesel contamination is still affecting groundwater quality(Figure <br /> 5) - <br />' MW-4 was installed down gradient (at that time) from MW-2 to detect possible movement of <br /> used motor oil in the groundwater from the contamination source (former waste oil USTs at <br /> MW-2) No oil was detected in the groundwater at MW-4, indicating that used oil contamination <br /> has not spread down gradient from MW-2 as far as MW-4 <br /> 1 p►�'�rl <br /> MW4 continues to show contamination from gasoline, diesel, oxygenates and BTEX <br />' Groundwater flow was south/southeast in Dec 2001, east in Mar 2002, and now north/northeast <br /> in June 2002 This coupled with a very low gradient, will likely result in contamination <br />' remaining in relatively close proximity to the source(s) <br />' 5.2 Recommendations <br />' EI recommends <br /> 1 Continued removal of floating oil from MW-2 every two to four weeks, depending upon <br />' re-charge rate, until motor oils no longer appear <br />' 2 Continue quarterly monitoring of the four groundwater monitoring wells at CTL to <br /> accumulate data as a basis for future actions <br /> I / <br /> Envimneenng,Inc Project No 02 007 16 Page 6 <br />