ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012621 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

L� g 'f.� 1 WE E wt descriptions from each soil type encountered cn the drilling logs (Appendix I). Field analysis of soil samp]as using the FID recorded the highest organic vapor readings ,.n samples from monitoring well borings 1 and 4. Similarly fi,_ld inspection of samples detected the strongest product odors from these two wells with slight odors noted at increasing depths in well borings at greater distances. Selected soil samples were laboratory analyzed to determine R-nzene, Toluene, Xylene and total volatile hydrocarbon concentr- ations. Analyses were performed by purge and trap gas chromato- graphy, EPA Method 5030, with flame ionization detection and ph,.toionization detection as per EPA Methods 8015 and 8020. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix III. The soil sample collected at a depth of 19 feet in well bore 3 contained t+b the highest contaminant level; 75 mg/kg (ppm) total volatile I «r' hydrocarbons. Concentrations for. samples from well borings 9, 2 and 4 were 68 ppm (at 25 ft. ) , 33 ppm (at 24 ft. ), and 22 ppm (at 14 ft. ) re!•.�ectively. r GROUNDWATER MONITORING i Periodic monitoring of wells at the site has continued since their initial installations in May 1986 through August 1986 s7 (Table 1). Groundwater monitoring to determine the presence of free product and the depth of the liquid interface wap conducted in accordance with Groundwater Technology's Standard Operating Procedure 8 (Appendix II). The surveyed well head elevations and the monitoring data for August 19, 1986 allowed the con- struction of a groundwater gradient map (Figure 8). Hater table elevation hyJrographs for 8 of the groundwater monitoring wells in the study area were nrafted through the August 25, 1986 -`�-' monitoring (Appendix TV). Changes in product thickness with time ib