Laserfiche WebLink
22 June 2004 <br /> AGE-NC Project No 95-0167 <br /> Page 4 of 4 <br />' • The contaminant plume appeared to be confined to the general area of the former UST <br /> location and MW-1 With exception to 1,2-DCA which increased in MW-1, TPH-g,BTEX <br /> and MTBE all decreased for the second consecutive quarter Petroleum hydrocarbons were <br /> not detected in perimeter wells MW-2, MW-3, MW-4, MW-5 and MW-6 <br /> • In addition, petroleum hydrocarbons were not detected in a grab ground water sample <br /> collected and analyzed in April 1997 from soil boring P4,south of the former UST location <br />' 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> Based on present site conditions, AGE recommends <br /> i0 Continued quarterly ground water monitoring at the site The next monitoring will be <br /> scheduled for June 2004 <br /> • Preparation of a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) The CAP should include a discussion and <br /> recommendation of remediation options for the site (e g in-situ air or ozone sparging, soil <br />'. vapor extraction, ground water extraction, or monitored natural attenuation) <br />' 6.0 LIMITATIONS <br /> Our professional services were performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised by <br />' environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities The findings were based mainly <br /> upon analytical results provided by an independent laboratory Evaluations of the hydrogeologic <br /> conditions at the site for the purpose of this investigation are made from a limited number of <br />' available data points (i a monitoring wells and ground water samples), and subsurface conditions <br /> may vary away from these data points No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the <br />' professional interpretations, opinions and recommendations contained in this report <br />' Advanced GeOEnvironmental,Inc <br />