Laserfiche WebLink
A conversation with Mr. Dale Kuenzli on June 25th indicates <br /> ' that the tanks have been petro tested as being tight, therefore <br /> It appears the contamination is due to the older tank <br /> Areal Extent of Contamination <br /> The investigation to identify the areal and vertical extents <br /> r of contamination consisted of placing borings on a 20 ' grid <br />' pattern centered on the previous high readings located in <br /> B-4 (p) . To differentiate, all previous borings will be followed <br /> with (p) to indicate previous. The borings were initially taken <br /> eastward from B-4 (p) as this was the expected hydrogeologIc <br /> gradient due to topography and the location of a small creek at <br /> the eastern border of the property (see boring plan) . <br />' In order to find the eastern extents, of contamination, <br /> borings were taken in a relatively straight line eastward from <br /> B-4 (p) . The field instrument, an HNU photoionzzation detector <br /> equipped with a 10. 2 eV probe indicated that the highest levels <br /> of contamination occured in a zone approximately 11 to 16 feet <br /> below the ground surface. The contaminant plume appears to be <br /> thickest (have the greatest vertical area) closer to the tank <br /> installation. The contamination was also investigated to the <br /> north and south and delineated to be an approximately 60 foot by <br /> 75 foot area. Borings adjacent to the tank installation to the <br /> west and north did not indicate any contaminant presence. B-3(p) <br /> tindicated some small amount of contamination to ' the south <br /> however other southerly borings did not indicate contaminant <br /> presence. <br /> 1 <br /> Page 35 <br /> I <br /> 1 72 <br />