Laserfiche WebLink
• <br /> The soil samples taken after removal of the UST' s in 1987 were <br /> below detection limits for all tested compounds Although the <br /> depths that the samples were taken were not stated, it is assumed <br /> that they would have been no deeper than 16 or 17 feet below <br /> grade, some 20 feet above the depth at which contamination was <br /> noted in MW-1 & 15 ' above that found in MW-2 It is possible <br /> that the contamination is from another source, and not the <br /> removed tanks, but available data is not conclusive <br /> 3 . Gradient data & lines of equal concentrations neither confirm <br /> nor eliminate the removed UST' s as the source of contamination. <br /> Additional monitoring data may assist in resolving this issue . <br /> 4 The limits of soil and groundwater contamination have not <br /> been located in any direction, and additional work will be needed <br /> to delineate the extent of the contamination <br /> RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> 1 Put the three existing wells on a quarterly monitoring <br /> schedule so that additional gradient & other data can be <br /> collected and analyzed to assist in determining the direction and <br /> type of further investigative work <br /> 2 . Once sufficient data has been received and analyzed, further <br /> investigative work may be proposed That work could include soil <br /> borings, "push" type soil/water probes, or other techniques . Due <br /> to the relatively high concentrations of BTEX in the groundwater, <br /> it is believed that a minimum of two (2) additional quarterly6 <br /> sampling events will be necessary in order to indicate the <br /> appy iatqlcourse of action. V�V, , P <br /> W 1 Hunter & As, <br /> gu 10 , 1995 0 GEp�� y <br /> c S . Valentine ��� <br /> RWQCS <br /> � Ih1LLWt4.141NTER � <br /> NO 860 <br /> �slq� <br /> QFC <br /> • <br /> 10 <br />