Laserfiche WebLink
1 that this contamination was likely the result of overspill from <br /> 2 filling the tank. <br /> 3 b. Soil Sampling In The Vicinity Of The UST <br /> Indicates That All Overspill Contamination Was <br /> 4 Removed. <br /> 5 <br /> In order to ensure complete remediation of the tank <br /> 6 <br /> 71 excavation, Petitioner arranged for contaminated soil to be <br /> excavated and disposed of off-site. Contaminated soil was <br /> 8 <br /> screened as it was removed from the excavation and an additional <br /> 9 <br /> five feet of soil was over-excavated from the walls and the floor <br /> 10 of the UST pit. No contamination of concern remained. <br /> 11 <br /> Confirmatory samples taken from the walls and the floor of the <br /> 12 <br /> excavation after the soil removal indicated that all contaminated <br /> 13 <br /> soils were removed as required by applicable guidelines. Only <br /> 14 <br /> trace levels of toluene (.0006 ppm-. 005 ppm as compared to an <br /> 15 <br /> action level at .1 ppm) and xylene ( .006 ppm-.12 ppm as compared <br /> 16 <br /> to an action level at 1.75 ppm) were detected in the UST grave <br /> 17 <br /> after the excavation. Summerlin (SG&D) Decl. , Exhibit F. <br /> 18 <br /> C. Groundwater SaMples Immediately Below The Tank <br /> 19 Indicate That The Groundwater Was Not Imr>actgd By <br /> Minor Soil Contamination Immediately Surrounding <br /> 20 the UST. <br /> 21 <br /> (1) Toluene Detections. Because of the soil <br /> 22 <br /> sampling in the UST pit, the Health Department attempts to make <br /> 23 <br /> much of the fact that toluene was detected at a concentration of <br /> 24 <br /> only 6/10ths of one part per billion (.0006 ppm) in a groundwater <br /> 25 <br /> sample taken from the well installed through the tank pit <br /> 26 <br /> immediately below the soil excavation during the second round of <br /> 27 <br /> sampling at the site and at levels of less than .0006 ppm in <br /> 28 <br /> -7- H\VMC\C0L0RSPT\APPEAL.PL4(5P2) <br />