ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012731 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 I Franzia believes that the extensive soil contamination is a result of, poor housekeeping in using an above ground gasoline tank and not associated with the underground tanks. -� The highest concentrations were detected beneath the area where the above ground tank was located. The results of tha laboratory analysis on the composite samples reported low levels of BTEX and moderate levels of TPHG (Table 3 and Appendix I). SEMCO obtained an aeration permit from the San Joaquin County Air Pollution Control District (Appendix IT). The permit allowed for 50 cubic yards of soil to be aerated daily. This permit was used for aerating all soil excavated. In July 1989, WaterWork submitted a second re-excavation workplan to the San Joaquin County Public Health Services, to remove the contamination remaining in the east wall. Verbal approval to continue the re-excavation were received in September and the work was completed on September 28 and 29. An additional 1200 cubic yards of soil were re;noved,uto ensure that all contamination was removed. F3'�3d9 depicts the final size and shape a£ ;the excavation and t acate ons o E the five �lazl aril three £door "confi' ma o sales Tho--samples were analysed '`for""' T 3l ar}� T "' thaeulrrep4z .ed,. _:no., aaricentrations, .above meho e.tootzari ],hr nits ( All the soil removed from the pit was spread out approximately six inches thick and allowed to aerate per the air discharge permit. In December 1989, approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil were tested to see if it was clean enough to place back in the excavation. Fifteen, two to one composite samples were collected (Figure 5) and analyzed for BTEX and TPHG. The results reported levels below method detection limits axcept in sample SP-lA & 1B which had a xylene concentration of 0.0124 ppm (Table 5 and Appendix I). Since the soil presented no threat to groundwater, it was placed bacx in the excavation along with clean imported fill and compacted. - The remaining soil was aerated until May 1990 when eleven, two to one composite samples were collected and analyzed for BTEX and TPHG. The results ra.ported low levels of hydrocarbons in all the samples. B.C. Laboratories was asked to confirm the results because of suspected laboratory contamination. It was determined that only samples C3 and C4, Dl and D2, and D3 and D4 had low levels of hydrocarbcns while the rest of the samples were below method detection limits. B.C. Laboratories determined that ethylene glycol used at the laboratory was contaminated resulting-_-_i.n _.__.__._.—.—_..____._.--------------------_---- - — -__c ---.. _..... -- -- ----------- ----anoma:lo�s__daca: ___Analyta:cal results as onfirmed by B.C. - Laboratories is presented in Table b. Verbal permission was _ obtained from the San Joaquin County Public Health Services to use all 2 ,.