Laserfiche WebLink
QUARTERLY REVIEW <br /> 4614 W Turner Rd , Lodi <br /> Page 2 <br /> Well MW-2 was covered wi to full pallets , and MW-9 was inaccessible <br /> due to aamage during construction_ activities at the site . The <br /> construction was unrelated to the environmental pro3ect <br /> Groundwater information is summarized in Table 1 A gradient map <br /> was prepared based on information gathered on April 11 , 1991 , and <br /> is presented in Figure 3 <br /> Groundwater samples were obtained from the 8 available wells . <br /> Laboratory analyses indicate that benzene was present in MW-1 and <br /> MW-3 at concentrations of 320 ppb and 1 . 7 ppb , respectively . Total <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline ( TPHg) were detected in MW-1 and <br /> MW-3 at concentrations of 4 , 700 ppb and 390 ppb , respectively <br /> Laboratory analyses are summarized in Table 2 . <br /> 7/19/ 91 <br /> Groundwater levels were obtained from 9 monitoring wells at the <br /> site Monitoring well MW-9 remained inaccessible Groundwater <br /> information is summarized in Table 1 A gradient map was prepared <br /> based on the irnformata.on gathered on July 19 , 1991 , and is <br /> presented as Figure 4 <br /> Groundwater samples were obtainea from the 9 available wells <br /> Lanoratory analyses indicate that benzene was present in MW-1 ana <br /> .BIW-3 , and MW-10 at concentrations of 120 ppb , 2 . 6 ppb . and 11 ppb <br /> respectively Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) <br /> were detected in MW-1 , MW-3 , and MW-10 at concentrations of 880 <br /> ppb , 67 ppb, and 340 ppb , respectively Laboratory analyses are <br /> summarized in Table 2 <br /> We believed the July 19 sampling of MW-10 to be erroneous , as no <br /> Previous samplings had detectea these contaminants in MW-10 In <br /> addition , no contaminants were detected in MW-6 , which lies in the <br /> pati: between. MW10 and the tan's site RESNA did not advise <br /> Sebastiani of these results until late September . We were unnappy <br /> that they did not bring such unusual readings to our attention <br /> sooner We worked with RESNA for the next 3 months to determine <br /> the cause of these unusual readings We ended up feeling that <br /> RESITA aas not properly addressing our concerns We explored other <br /> options , ana finalty nad an independent test done by Caltest Labs <br /> on February 21 , 1992 (see discussion on page 3 ) <br /> 10/25/ 91 <br /> Groundwater levels were ootainea from 8 monitoring wells a-- t.^,e <br /> Monitoring we_ _ MW-- 9 =emainea inaccessible , and MW-2 was <br /> cc•.ered bi fu' , cal lets G-cund•aater inforTation is summarized in <br /> - 7 <br />