Laserfiche WebLink
z <br /> ":hA vgVw .sem <br /> NO <br /> - _ <br /> t <br /> S <br /> Coca-Cola Enterprises -West <br /> USTEC aob No. 90054.03 <br /> ' r The analytical chemistry data indicates that'LTH concentrations Quantified as gasoline and the <br /> . R <br /> aromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX)decreased to or remained below laboratory detection limits for <br /> € all six groundwater monitoring wells. TPH quantified as diesel increased in all ;rcurr.water <br /> monitoring wells to a maximum reading of 210 ppb for MW-3. The analytical test results for <br /> lead indicated MW-4 decreased from 0.015 ppm to below detection limits. All other wells <br /> remained below detection limits. <br /> In a plot of historical TPH gasolineconcentration3 compared to historical groundwater elevations <br /> far MW-1,an inverse relationship is suggested(Figure 5) TPH as asoline levels eak at times <br /> of lowest oundwater elevations suggesting that decreases in concentration ar. the result of <br /> water elevation increases. <br /> 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS <br /> i <br /> Six groundwater monitoring wells were measured and sampled in August 1991 by USTEC <br /> personnel. Groundwater measurement results indicate that the groundwater flow is generally <br /> �- to the northeast which is consistent with previous monitoring results. TPH gasoline and BTEX <br /> concentratiorts were below laboratory detection limits in all wells. The absence of TPH as <br /> -' gasoline in all six wells may be due to changes in the groundwater elevations, or may be due <br /> to upper"C"range gasoline hydrocarbons being reported and quantified using a diesel reference. <br /> �. Concentrations of'TPH as diesel were found in all six w com aced with one in the reviou� <br /> I <br /> ... quarterly sampling. Lead was not detected in any of the six wells. <br /> I <br /> Wd <br /> � w <br /> F3 <br /> i <br /> } i <br /> fit <br /> a <br />