ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0002219 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L 5 . 03 March 1999 ' =J AGE-NC Project No 95-0111 Page 2 of 4 ' • Total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as gasoline and as diesel (TPH-g and TPH-d) by EPA Method 8015 Modified for each range of hydrocarbons, ' • Volatile aromatic compounds (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes BTEX) by EPA Method 8020, and ' • Oxygenated compounds,di-isopropyl ether(DIPE),ethyl tertiary butyl ether(ETBE),methyl tertiary-butyl ether(MTBE),tertiary amyl methyl ether(TAME)tertiary butyl alcohol(TBA) by EPA Method 8260 Modified 1 ' 3.0. FINDINGS Ground water was inferred to have a northerly flow direction and was found to be locally impacted ' by petroleum hydrocarbons and oxygenated fuel additives ' . 3 1 GROUND WATER FLOW DIRECTION AND GRADIENT The relative ground water elevation in each well was calculated by subtracting the ground water depth from the surveyed relative casing elevations The depths to ground water and relative ground water elevations are tabulated in Table 1 All wells were surveyed relative to the casing of ' monitoring well MW-1,which had been assigned an arbitrary casing elevation of 20 feet The depth to ground water ranged from 6 44 feet below the well casing (bwc) in MW-4 to 9 67 feet bwc to MW-1 ' The relative ground water elevation at the site ranged from 10 82 feet in MW-3 to 9 36 feet in MW- 6 The relative ground water elevation decreased an average of 0 12 feet between September and ' December 1998 The inferred ground water flow direction at the site was towards the northeast, consistent with results obtained from 11 quarterly monrtonng events conducted since July 1995 The ground water gradient ` was approximately 0 005 ft/ft or 28 feet per mile, over the distance from the up gradient well (MW- 3)to the north edge of Grant Line Road (MW-6) The relative ground water elevation ssocontours ' are depicted in Figure 3 ' Advanced GeoEnviron mental Ine. 1