ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0009515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

f� I� On March 8, 1994,-Mr. Don Light, Del-Tech Geotechnical Support Services, arrived at the } site to develop the wells, measure depth of well, measure depth to water PLATE X, and ,} collect water samples from each well, EXHIBIT Q. The water samples on each monitoring well were put into three (3) VOA s and one (1) plastic pint container, leaving no headspace, properly sealed with plastic caps and preserved, E' and stored in an ice chest containing ice for transportation to a state certified laboratory. The water samples were delivered through chain of custody to FGL Environmental for analysis of BTEX (EPA Method 8020), TPH-Gas (EPA Method 8015 M Gas), and.LEAD j (EPA Method 200.9), EXHIBIT R. 4 Wong Engineers, Inc. surveyors established the elevations of the to On March 28, 199 , o g En g y p of the PVC casing for the monitoring wells based on the U.S.G.S. datum, which is sea level. f Ea The elevations were taken on the north side of the casing and were 9.00 for MWI, 8.74 for MW2, and 8.70 for MW3, EXHIBIT S and PLATE XI. After receiving the elevations, �! PLATE XII was made to determine the gradient of the water table at this site. Based on the current information the gradient is to the northeast at approximately Al feet per foot. 3 !; LABORATORY ANALYSIS RESULTS JiJ Ik. 1 SOIL SAMPLES: 1 The soil samples collected and delivered to FGL Environmental on February 28 and March 1, 1994, TABLE 1, were analyzed for BTEX (EPA Method 8020) on March 4, TPH-Gas (EPA Method 8015M Gas) on March 8, and total Lead (EPA Method 7420) on March 9, 1994. The laboratory analysis results are shown on TABLE 2 and EXHIBIT P. The laboratory results confirmed and generally agreed with what was detected in the field when boring and sampling was done. A questionable hydrocarbon odor was reported in sample MW1-2 (1512-16 ),but the laboratory results reported the soil in monitor well MWI as non- detect for all the analyzed contaminates. At the time of boring and sampling monitor well MW2, a questionable hydrocarbon odor (gasoline?) was noted in soils sample MW2-1 and strong odor and visible evidence of petroleum hydrocarbons in soil samples MW2-2 and MW2-3. This was verified by the laboratory results which reported 88 ppm TPH-Gas, 0.05 E . j ppm Ethel Benzene, and 0.2 ppm Xylene in soil sample MW2-1. Laboratory results showed ! 3 soil sample MW2-2 (151/2-16 ) to contain 1200 ppm TPH-Gas, 1.1 ppm Benzene, 5.0 ppm l h Ethyl Benzene, 1.3 ppm Toluene, and 3.0 ppm Xylene. Soil sample MW2-3 (20/2-21 ) contained 1.3 ppm TPH-Gas and 4 ppm Lead. The boring and sampling of monitor well MW3 reported no indications of hydrocarbon contamination and the laboratory results show E non-detect for the analyzed contaminates. WATER SAMPLES: i The water samples from the three monitoring wells delivered to FGL Environmental on li March 8, 1994, TABLE 2, were analyzed for Lead (EPA Method 200.9) on March 10, f E� BTEX (EPA Method 8020) on March 11, and TPH-Gas (EPA Method 8015M Gas) on March 17 and 18, 1994. The laboratory analysis results are shown on TABLE 2 and 6 I i I