Laserfiche WebLink
any other well <br />' The former diesel USTs caused moderate contaminate <br /> • on 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 later samples until December 2001 <br /> U VV <br /> and M 0.01_when contamination was detected again in MW-2 and MW-3, respectively <br /> Diesel contamination in MW-1 is also <br /> present, indicating that diesel contamination is still <br />' affecting groundwater quality (Figure 5) <br /> MW-4 was installed down gradient (at that time) from MW-2 to detect possible movement of <br /> tused 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 /> Shas not spread down gradient from MW-2 as far as MW-4 <br /> MW-4 continues to show contamination from gasoline, oxygenates and 13TEX <br /> Groundwater flow was south/southeast in Dec 2001, east in Mar 2002, north/northeast in June <br /> 2002 and now southeasterly in September 2002 This coupled with a very low gradient, will <br /> likely result in contamination 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 /> Environeenng,Inc Project No 02 00917 Page g <br /> I <br />