Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> .uu4 <br /> YES to both. <br /> 6. Were soil samples taken for every 20 linear feet of <br /> underground piping? <br /> NO. Field screening of the trenches left from the removal of the <br /> -.�Lraderground piping was performed by Walton Engineering for odor <br /> and visual staining. And on subsequent site visits by a WEGE <br /> geologist, field screening with a hand held PIG indicated that no <br /> petroleum hydrocarbon contamination existed along the product line <br /> trenches. <br /> 7. Were depth and location of soil samples submitted? <br /> YES, see Figure 3B and Table 3. <br /> and the monitoring that WEGE <br /> Based upon the preceding informationg <br /> P <br /> ormed this site should be considered for closure. We <br /> has perf , <br /> gasoline ranc, <br /> hydrocarbons found in the initial sampling <br /> feel the g Y <br /> g <br /> of the ground water associated with the tank excavgcion and <br /> I limited in extent and have been <br /> MW7. were ver <br /> monitor well y <br /> remediated via natural evaporation and dilution methods. <br /> - 'j SITE INVESTIGATION <br /> j The ground water was sampled in the three onsite monitoring wells <br /> j by a Western Geo-Engineers (WEGE) geologist. Surface elevation, <br /> depth to water and ground water elevation were recorded for each <br /> well (WEGE: TABLE 1) . No floating product was observed in any of <br /> the wells. Each well was sampled after 5 bailers (approximately 2 <br /> gallons) of water were removed; the "purged" water was "contained" <br /> in a labeled, secured 55 gallon drum on site. This water was <br /> later removed and disposed of at the Tracy <br /> Water Treatment Plant. <br /> From the well information, the ground water was contoured and a <br /> flow direction inferred (Figure 4A-4I) . <br /> DISCUSSION a <br /> Ground water contour maps were developed using the information <br /> obtained during the quarterly monitoring rounds and indicate <br /> j <br /> apparent flow directions to the northeast, see FIGURES 4A thru 4I. <br /> The analytical laboratory results show that TPH and BTEX <br /> concentrations in HW2 and MW3 have always been below reporting <br /> limits (BRL) . Monitor well MW1 initially showed ground <br /> contaminated on June 1 , 1988, with 4 PP gasoline range <br /> hydrocarbons and 41 ppb benzene. Sampling on August 11, 1988 <br /> showed that the gasoline range hydrocarbons were then below <br /> detection limits with 0.6 ppb benzene, which is below the State of <br /> page4 <br />