Laserfiche WebLink
AFFMF <br /> A WA WO <br /> ::. Working To Restore Nature <br /> r91 a <br /> r:y::J <br /> O Figures 1 through 4 depict the site location and nearby surface waters (Figure 1), the site <br /> to scale and former tank locations (Figure 2), current groundwater gradient contours <br /> (Figure 3) and the area of impact (Figure 4). <br /> NOo Water level data are presented in Table 1. During the investigative history of the site <br /> depth to groundwater has ranged from 5.64 to 9.24 feet below grade. <br /> o Tables 2 and 3 present the soil and groundwater analytical results. Tables 4 and 5 <br /> present the soil pile analytical results and the Baker tank remediation analytical results, <br /> respectively. <br /> o The area of residual soil contamination is depicted on Figure 4. Petroleum hydrocarbons <br /> are not present at or above method detection limits in the groundwater. <br /> G >` o Table b presents mass balance calculations for the petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soils <br /> which were excavated and those which remain in place. <br /> O Soil remediation methodology is described in section 3.2.1 (Remedial Actions) Soil. <br /> `I Petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil was excavated, to the extent physically possible, <br /> from the site. The excavated soil will be treated by processing through Western Stone <br /> Products' Hughson facility asphalt batch plant. Processing is expected to occur in <br /> March/April, 1994. <br /> i O No subsurface groundwater remediation system has been recommended or installed. <br /> Groundwater is not being impacted by the residual petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil. <br /> ri <br /> o In-situ remediation of the soil at this site was not recommended due to the fine grained <br /> nature of soils and the low volatility of the contaminants. Excavation was the Best <br /> OW01951REPOMkCLO12594.FNL 12 <br /> 'd 5_ <br />