Laserfiche WebLink
November 1990 -9- M88168D �) <br /> I <br /> CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> SOIL CONTAMINATION <br /> Based on field observations and laboratory analytical results <br /> obtained from the soil samples collected during the implementation of this <br /> supplemental site assessment, coupled with the laboratory analytical results of <br /> the confirmatory soil samples previously collected following site remediation in <br /> the-vicinity of the former UST excavation, soil contamination resulting from the <br /> inadvertent release of hydrocarbon products into the subsurface in the area of <br /> I <br /> the former UST does not exist. <br /> Analytical data obtained from the confirmatory soil samples collected <br /> January 9, 1990, following the completion of the soils removal program, exhibited <br /> only trace concentrations of toluene and xylenes at concentrations well below <br /> DOHS applied action levels (SGD, 1990, pg.4) . During this assessment total <br /> xylenes and total lead were the only contaminant constituents detected at or / <br /> above the practical quantitation limits, and where detected were found in <br /> concentrations assumed to be ambient and inherent to the area. <br /> SGD recommends that no additional site characterization of <br /> hydrocarbon contaminated soil be conducted at the site, and that the site be <br /> granted closure status, in regards to soil contamination, by SJLHD. <br /> I <br /> GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION <br /> Four irrigation/domestic ground water wells are located within a 50 <br /> foot radius of the site and were sampled as per SJLHD requirements on January 9, <br /> 1990 (SGD, 1990, pg. 5) . All four wells contained trace concentrations of <br /> benzene and three contained trace amounts of toluene. Both constituents were <br /> present in concentrations well below the applicable DWS action levels. <br /> The laboratory analytical results obtained from the ground water <br /> sample collected during the implementation of this assessment indicated that none <br /> of the contaminants evaluated for exist in excess of the applicable DWS action <br /> levels. <br />