Laserfiche WebLink
`� � .�: =; �^ �-x�sa.Sf �'� -� i�. �� ,� s `-a;�" 'e�,, ' .1 b:yes � ��•,�� �-= ;°� b -- "�§ ,_�;;�� :� �r', '�.-.t <br /> w <br /> L <br /> data rli.scuclr! 1 <br /> ssed herk:in, OW "t" does riot laelieve this. <br /> Ft factor that wot.t l d <br /> additional monitor walls- <br /> ANALYSIS OF WATER & SOIL SAMPLE DATA <br /> � '-2G' below <br /> significance <br /> The water table is shallow at this sil:e, aof bout ,£loafing <br /> ground level , we themeans vadoseYtzoneat nandpbeltionclwas found in <br /> should penetrate No contaminatuni <br /> product ort the watox table 1 <br /> water sample from any of the three in <br /> ononti weMW# <br /> any les, taken over orie month apart. <br /> either of the two samp so from the contaminated soil <br /> was located about lo' or <br /> of the excavation• If a <br /> sample found near the southerly end r well as 15' or <br /> significant spill had occurred, it is reasonable to assume <br /> rated lo' laterally adraulic gradient <br /> that it would havethPgvadosa zone, where by <br /> 20' vertically i and it would have been observed <br /> is not a factor, to MW # 1 at 24' below tthe <br /> there. Perforations commence inbaen#located at 251 to was <br /> surface, the water table having Subsequently, <br /> below ground level by the dr by <br /> Del-Tech when <br /> located about two or 3 feet higher by the driller. This <br /> levels than the level found ermeability and slow <br /> measuring owing to relatively low Ping <br /> was probably Allowing for the recessed Cal J <br /> in this well could. be about 6" <br /> drainage to the well in <br /> bailing the .. <br /> head, the top °f p water level . However, by <br /> ling. which we know happened, the water <br /> below the standing Pulled into <br /> wells down for samp <br /> at the top of the water table <br /> kweduld have been <br /> product sampled, <br /> the well and any P' <br /> feted with the perforations <br /> Wells 2 and 3 were four feet <br /> completed <br /> found in any sample from either <br /> higher. fro contamination <br /> well . <br /> All soil samples from MW # 1 .& 2 showed no contamination; <br /> MW # 3 an increasing amount of Toluene Yet none <br /> d <br /> however 21, and 26' ` •009, oio and .032 mg/kgs ' whose <br /> at 16' les from this We I <br /> was detecaae�nleveelwwasrabout 23' below ground level, <br /> standing This indicates that the <br /> according to Del-Tech measureming to hydrostatic head from <br /> water is rising in the well owing <br /> sands lower than the area where the Toluene was found. The <br /> increasing amount of contaminant with depth indicates <br /> from <br /> a reasonable hypothesis because the <br /> this observer) that the contaminant mfg and other <br /> the surface. This is store and repair trucks degradedher <br /> entire area is used to cover was badly <br /> heavy equipment. Also the asphalt access to the vadose <br /> e this area, which would allow easy the Groundwater has <br /> zone from surface spills. zn snit haat, the direction of <br /> not been imp <br /> acted, and even if i� had been possible <br /> found at the site of the <br /> the water ttoktYtercantamwould inationnot sndicate an <br /> connection <br /> .pul1ed-_tan <br /> k. --- <br /> 9 <br />