Laserfiche WebLink
Coyner Property Page 4 <br /> Tank Closure Report <br /> Project 103.5 <br /> August 21,1996 <br /> There is a domestic water well on the Property that is in active use_ It lies in excess of 250 <br /> feet northwest (probably up-gradient) of all three former tanks. <br /> 3.4 Hydrocarbon Distribution in the Soil <br /> Based on the laboratory results, a small amount of gasoline was released from tank 2, and a <br /> small amount of diesel was released from tankl. The complete vertical and horizontal extent <br /> of the impacted soil is not known, but based on the levels reported from the confirmation <br /> samples, it seems unlikely that it extend very much below the tank pit bottoms or that <br /> groundwater was impacted. <br /> 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> 4.1 Conclusions <br /> I. Of the three UST's which were formerly located on the Property, one was found to have <br /> impacted the soil sufficiently to cause the County PHS/EHD to deny final closure. The <br /> denial was based on a leaching potential estimate for xylene as described in the State <br /> LUFT Manual, <br /> 2. The Iaboratory analysis of the soil sample from beneath the tank of concern, indicates <br /> that non detectable levels of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH-G) and three of the <br /> four BTEX compounds were present. The only hydrocarbon detected was xylene of <br /> which 11 parts per billion (ppb) were found. This low level of contamination suggests <br /> residual impacted soil does not pose a significant threat to the groundwater. Moreover, <br /> the nearest domestic water well is in excess of 250 feet from the former tank site. <br /> 3. The nearest domestic water well is more than 250 feet away and in an up gradient <br /> position. In the event that groundwater were to be impacted by hydrocarbons, it seems <br /> very unlikely that drinking water would be materially degraded. <br /> 4. Based on the groundwater monitoring results from the nearby Gilley's site, it appears <br /> that the depth to groundwater under the former leaking tank is greater than 50 feet <br /> (actually 63 ft BGS) rather than the less than less than 50 feet which was assumed in the <br /> leaching potential assessment. If the correct groundwater level were input to the <br /> leaching potential table, it appears the level of BTEX which was left in the soil would <br /> meet the LUFT Manual guidelines for site closure. <br /> 5. Recent research by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and guidelines adopted <br /> by the State and LOP regulators indicate that shallow soil contamination by motor fuels <br /> Phase One Environmental Inc. <br /> 2937 Veneman Ave.,#B240 Modesto,CA 95356 (209)569-0293 <br />