Laserfiche WebLink
and found to be 33. 33 feet below the top of the well casing <br /> (which is Very nearly flush with ground surface ) . These water <br /> levels were more comparable to those noted during construction <br /> of both MW-2 and MW-3, and discussed further in Section 4 . 5 . <br /> 4. 3 SOILS ANALYSIS <br /> The results of both soil physical and chemical analyses are <br /> presented in the Appendix and described below. <br /> 4 . 3 . 1 Ph sical Anal ses <br /> Grain size analyses (Phase I only) are presented in Table 4-3, <br /> and plotted against depth in Figure 4-4 . Although grain size <br /> analy,<es were performed only for selected samples, they <br /> generally confirm field descriptions. <br /> 4. 3.2 Chemical Analyses <br /> Results of the soil chemical analyses are presented in Table <br /> 4--4 . With the exception of one soil sample, collected at a <br /> depth of 55 ft below ground s1ar!,: _a (MW-1 ) , and two at 30 and <br /> 35 ft (MW-2) , the soils were typically free of hydrocarbons <br /> and lead. These results are compared with California <br /> designated levels in Table 4-5. <br /> 4 . 4 GROUNDWATER CHEMISTRY <br /> The results of the ground water analysis are presented in <br /> Table 4-6. Benzene, toluene, xylene, and total hydrocarbon <br /> levels of 6.8, 17, 4. 1 and 78 milligrams per liter (mg/L) , <br /> respectively, were detected in the ground water sample <br /> collected from MW-1 . Corresponding levels of these <br /> constituents at both MW-2 and MW-3 were less than the <br /> detection limit. These concentrations are compared with <br /> California Water Quality Goals in Table 4-7. <br /> t <br /> 4--10 <br />