Laserfiche WebLink
03 September 2004 <br /> AGE-NC Project No 98-0448 <br /> Page 11 of 13 <br /> No other fuel components or additives were detected by laboratory analysis Previous and current <br /> analytical results of ground water monitoring well samples are summarized in Tables 7 and 8 The <br /> laboratory reports (CTEL Project No 0407-044) and chain of custody forms are presented in <br /> Appendix K, GeoTracker confirmation pages of the submitted laboratory electronic deliverable <br /> format (EDF) files are included in Appendix D <br /> 5 0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS <br /> The findings from the SVE and IAS well installations are as follows <br /> Generally, less permeable, fine sandy silt was observed at depths of 15 feet bsg, more <br /> permeable, silty fine sands and fine to medium sands were encountered at depths between <br /> 20 feet and 35 feet bsg Boring logs are included in Appendix B Geologic cross section GC' <br /> depicts general lithology beneath the site (Figure 3) <br /> • ' TPH-g was detected from VW-6 (25 feet) and from AW-5 (25 feet and 35 feet) at <br /> concentrations as high as 1,700 mg/kg The estimated adsorbed petroleum hydrocarbon- <br /> impacted plume beneath the site is depicted in cross-sectional view C-C' (Figure 8), and <br /> generally depicts an undetermined mass of hydrocarbons west of the well VW-6 <br /> • Various BTEX compounds were detected from three soil samples analyzed at concentrations <br /> as high as 2 5 mg/kg benzene, 40 mg/kg toluene, 20 mg/kg ethylbenzene and 170 mg/kg <br /> xylenes <br />' The implications from the Jul 2004 ground water monitoring events are as follows <br /> Y <br /> I • July 2004 ground water elevations ranged between 10 40 feet (MW-1) and 12 03 feet <br /> (MW-4B) below MSL The ground water elevation at the site was within the screened <br /> intervals 6f wells MW-1,MW-2, MW-4A and MW-6,which should provide representative <br /> Ishallow ground water conditions, however, well MW-4B is "drowned" with water <br /> approximately 23 feet over the screen and yields a sample more representative_of deeper <br /> ground water conditions (Table 6) <br /> • Ground water elevation data collected during the 02 July 2004 did not suggest that ground <br /> water mounding was occurring due to air sparging at the site (Figure 6) _ <br /> • Ground water flow direction at the site was toward the southwest at an estimated gradient <br /> of 0 015 ft/ft (Figure 6) <br /> Advanced GeoEnvironmental,Inc <br />