Laserfiche WebLink
pre `n n-A YET I 3 .�' ''' `rtT.Wj' =�S'{ <br /> .? 'r T? .ar=_.M, :.�.a.="r' ? �7 TM- a.. �-9 t_g..� a=� ." '�� Rs'�x• .�.-� � Sni.'.r.x��a 7�.sr ,,�� u."�'Sm+� . <br /> s � aa � �`cF 3 .. . _ xcYt - srx � �' :z y -a <br /> tCq ".,'4. ,,.PIN.. -'sr '� ' . '` F�'- �£t< ✓.W� ry^ 'C <br /> o • .9 =ss.c'X.Vii'. '` "��- �" p`_rr..y�_'.z._e3,".t��"2�;"n'�� `t:w�:........-=�.•,'� 'E! s- k;.-:_ <br />.-3 <br /> Amil30, 1991 <br /> Qttartarly Monitoring. Quarter ,�(;� 3f;[)12•I <br /> E Former Unocal Station 285`1, Stockton. California M <br /> dellyl <br /> ! Results of analyses indicated +'&tat hydrocarbons were present i� tltc s,V�i�tict continue(] atat she <br /> cavity (Applied GeoSystettts, April 28, 1988, Report No. 3801.-1). <br /> site in June 1988. Three soil borings (f3-1 through [3 3} I c Giro yllientist Julere drilled yt28. 1988, <br /> monitoring wells MW-1 through h1W-3, respectively (Appallsile -'I'd <br /> Report No.38012-2). Irt Au3ust lis we$e i stalledtnitwo of the blarings (Applied GeoSystettts� <br /> offsite and two monitoring w <br /> December 12, 1990, Report No. 38012-5). <br /> In response to the detection of <br /> Fare cground rbons in <br /> water i� Jr n ground water, <br /> Rcs3ult5 of previous <br /> GeoSystelils <br /> began periodic monitoring <br /> monitories events iii l est ond that lcentoat ands of hydrocarbons w`etre detectedtin well 11OW-2. <br /> water saples collected <br /> from tile five wells; thea h hi g <br /> Applied GeeSystems evaluated the direction of groundwater flaw to!;e nortltcast I"root Julie <br /> 1988 to May 1990, and the average gradient was 0.002 before the wells were dry. "13te <br /> direction of ground water now for May 30. 1990 is shown on Plate 11-2. <br /> rottnd-Watcr Samnlin <br /> An Applied GeoSysiems geologist was onsite November 19. 1940, to collect ground water <br /> samples from wells WtW-4 and N1W-5 for subjective analysis of hydrocarbons using <br /> ted no subjective <br /> procedures summarized in in attachmwells ent <br /> ent to itis tt'.ort- CunTile sul t�ve reist sults of subjective <br /> evidence of hydrocarbon <br /> analyses are presented in Table 1. <br /> The geologist purged wellsst dv Regard NI <br /> s <br /> was and V ined thevater fieldsamples <br /> accofor <br /> inpan edlaboratory <br /> th <br /> analyses. A Chain of Cu <br /> samples to the laboratory. A copy of that record is attached. The methods of ground-water <br /> red opsite <br /> sampling are discussed in eel attachment <br /> to this report. <br /> of laboratorypuranalyseswater was . Thewater <br /> in properly labeled 17-1✓steel pending <br /> was removed and disposed of by Armour Petroleun, of Fairfield, California, the week o <br /> l January 14, 1991. <br /> { Laborrto Anal ses <br /> The water samples were submitted for analyses of total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline <br /> (TPHg)using modified Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)Nf nlhoEPA 5 and benzene,d <br /> toluene, ethylbenzene, and total �ylenc isomers ((3TEX} g i <br /> Laboratory analyses were performed at Applied Analytical Environmental Laboratories in <br /> Sacramento. California ('Hazardous Waste Testing Laboratory Na. E773). <br /> Applied 0eOSySte177s <br />