Laserfiche WebLink
T", <br /> r - - ixy--f- ��.! � L � � S� - - u f -J. yE ".- r1[ �� a4 � • Y. �� �.;. f7 �� „o <br /> r - Y �' r'-£:a r r`� .f .r r -F ..s $ %,t J..x-'au f.c' • � - � t � E.�. k- r '_�' . �. <br /> 30-May:1996 <br /> AGE-NC-'Project N0 .96-0224 <br /> Page4 of5 :T� <br />' <br /> -.F,T :o '3b' <br /> 4.2: :LABORATORY RESULTS OF,PROBE BORING:SOtt M SAMPLES <br /> TPH- and BTE&X were.detected"in-?samples P2-10,'P2 15,�P3 10 and_P3 15 xat.maximum `. T <br /> g : <br /> ..concentrations yof q80-milligrams per lulograin (equivalent to.gaits per million: ppm)and.73 ppm, <br />` :respectively A soil sample analyzed frbm,probe boring P2 at`l.^S feet�contained MTBE it-V ppm F. a <br /> r <br /> ._' However;the presence.ofMTBE was not confirmed during'duplicate analysis Soil samples:analyzed' <br /> from probe boring P3 at 20'-and:25 -linear feet,`-:did not contain detectable quaintities of-petroleum ' <br /> hydrocarbons Detectable concentrations of`petfoleum hydrocarbons we�re-not present jn;soil samples <br /> Collected rfrom probe boring.P l <br /> r � .• 't i �,�a: s., - .�h '� ry fr�,=t :s�" - .q a� - _ -- � '� ... -.:}1 <br /> TPH d and BTE&X, were detected �n samples collected'from pro6" b6ring=P4 ;at maximum'=F r <br /> concentrations of 4,700 ppm'arid 2:8 ppm, respectively.,Soil samples`:a�alyzed-from probe boring P4 <br /> � r <br /> r at-10 and 30 feet did not contaiii.detectable concentrations of petroleum ns <br /> hydrocarbo <br /> ff <br /> k; +lr — •rh.�'t -r; '�i' At ra. ';•. ° <br /> Cross sections depicting the-lithology an estimated extent.of.impacted soil ar'e shown:in Figures <br /> arid.4 Analytical results of soil samples are summarized on Table 1 "The laboratory re0oft(Mobile . <br /> r : One -Lab oratories_Project No. ADNIRPT)acid chain=6f:custody farms are,presented in'Appendix _ <br /> k 3 -T <br /> :L <br /> h •� a -� e i � � ,� � ', .r r rpt r.�^ ,�'-,- �' ,, i � - <br /> - <br />` -MASS HYDROCARBONS <br /> -­--- <br /> j4O <br /> w <br /> 'l` r-- -r�� <br /> ZZ. Ac' <br /> Amass-..volume calculation of the.remaining iinpacted�soil:at the site was performed:-'An average F <br /> a F concentration:`of°,1-0,800- -prim TPH-g was used° to calculate the .total .volume of remaining;• <br /> .. hydrocarbons, in the vicinity of the.former gasoline UST. An'averageKconcentration of 4,000 ppm was'f ` <br /> used to calculate the.total volume of�remairiing hydrocarbons, 3n the vic;nity=of the former heatti'iignoil <br /> - _ E -- <br /> UST <br /> - c - _ 4 Y} ,-' n t. at` � 3c*.�,i _ e" :"s-.�� '`,�'",r '`"d yt, r ••,� <br /> Based upon data collected during investigation of the former UST area, approximately 126 5 gallons <br /> Y <br /> of gasoline remain in soil beneath'-the forrimer gasoline UST�Wihile,:approximately 324..2 gallons of <br /> r T . heatuig oil.(TPH=d)are-residual in the.soil in the vicinity oft.he former heating oil UST. Hydrocarbon e, <br /> impacted soil>voIume assurnptzons and calculations arejficluded as Appendix D ; k <br /> ,.. 5 0 DISCISSION , <br /> Assuming that:the°gasoline plume_has a symmetrical'spreading pattern while rtugrazv <br /> tmgJdownward, ` <br /> k Y . _ _ <br /> t : and using fhe data''provided by Pel;PZ and P3; tlle,volume of intp'act`d soil in-the vicinity of the _ . <br /> gasolzne UST is estimated to- 'e 29 cubic.yards A R =1 fi <br />`F r 3 ,ter - <br /> s Y With only,one :robe-bonngyin the vicmitV of the heating oil plume; t is not possible to fully define <br /> p . <br /> -y"' rtvsr. r <br /> -[- <br /> - r <br /> ' Li" ` <br /> .- 4- +e .;G Y? <br />