Laserfiche WebLink
.� Aline M. Farr, Ph.D. <br /> Mevc S"tva <br /> March 21. 1995 <br /> It is my undersianding, that the County requested that additional soil samptcs be collected. <br /> due to the detection levels for BTEX for the sail samples collected from the tank excavations <br /> being higher than required by the County. Two borings were drilled in Noverrlbet 1993 to <br /> address; this concern of the County. One of the borings (B-t) was locxted at the foirnerr <br /> location of Waste Oil Tank WO-1. The second boring (B-2) was locattd in the vicinity of <br /> the three other USTs. As summarized in Table 1, TPH , ethylbGnxene, and xylenes, wert <br /> detected in one of the gull samples tollecled from $-1 at a depth of 8 feet The boring log <br /> for this sample indicates -that there were no hydrocarbon odors below a depth of 9Y2 feet The <br /> absence of petroleum hydrumbons below this depth was confirmed by analyzing a sample <br /> from boring B-1 at a depth of IS feet. This sail sample had non-detectablt concentrations of <br /> TPH and RTEX <br /> Rv�ew of Saiy�SrotwDles licsul <br /> As specified by the Tri-Regional Guidelines, one soil boring was installed at the former <br /> location of the 500-g2llon UST The results from this boring were reviewed relative to the <br /> methodology specified in the LLTFT Manual. Applyin the leaching potential analysis <br /> outlined in the LVFT Manual results in a Sale rating of 4+4. Based on this rating` and the <br /> concentration of xylenes altd TFIH2 detected in one sample from Boring B-1, the LUFT <br /> manual states that a "General Kish Appraisal" needs to be perforated. Further, the LUFT <br /> Manual states that "the gerteiral risk eppraisal is more sophisticated than the leaching potential <br /> analysce' (LUFT. p 29) and that the eppraisai "is based on a technical foundation which <br /> conservatively accounts for influences on pollutant migrarion." (1rUFT, p.28) <br /> Using the Gmeratl Risk Appraisal, as recommended by the LUFT Manual., the acceptable <br /> cumulative soil contarninxtion levels for protection of groundwater at the Brannon Tam Site <br /> are as follows }. I ppm Benzene, 100 ppm toluene, 200 ppm xylenes, and 300 ppm <br /> ethlybenxene. As summarized in Table 1, of these four compounds, only xylenes and <br /> ethylbenzwe have been detected The rnaxiMuM cumulative soil cordamirlf ice levels fol <br /> thest two compounds ar the Brannon Tire Site aac. 2.7 ppm far xylentrs and 0.49 ppm for <br /> ethylbenitene These soil concentrations are significantly less than rhe acceptable cumulaitve <br /> soil contamination levels specified by the General Risk Appraisal. In fact, the concentrations <br /> detected would be acceptable if the distance to highest groundwater was only 5 feet <br /> ` Ybc NOMbers speraried tlt Table 2-1 providr "a ximPlibcd way 10 M91%the possiNc lbmar to giouiud <br /> water froze uopaaminativo Wits, Alternate elvowup levels, based on additional sitr-specirk aualysim, <br /> would sapctatde lite initirj atlowatir levels." (LUFT, p.207. <br /> As sided in etre LtrFi'Maui, the omcftraadions fat TP,4 tisled 9n 11•c Leaching lkaeatiar't•ablc weir <br /> appi*Xituolvd by using; rht ascaeptable 13'iX&L-levels divided try their pet—at_Mpuniliort in gasotl"r, <br /> ' Hasid ea t tneam #w-4 piceipils4oa of 24.4 imches(Mtuured ter 'S"wAlon Firc Stairva 94)sod s <br /> diolmot eta Highest V0'W4wz1cr fM sail sample of 35-40[t <br />