Laserfiche WebLink
4. <br /> SCSA—University Park <br /> Site Background <br /> Page 3 - <br /> quantified as kerosene (TPH-K), MTBE, and 1,2-DCA were detected in the groundwater sample collected <br /> from monitor well MW-3 at concentrations generally consistent with historical results. The groundwater <br /> gradient direction (northeast) was similar to the gradient direction measured during the soil and <br /> groundwater investigation activities conducted on December 18, 2001 (slightly north of east). <br /> Condor prepared a Problem Assessment Work Plan (PAWP) dated January 23, 2003, to describe <br /> additional groundwater investigation at the site. The PAWP was prepared at the request of Mr. David <br /> Rosso for the Trustees of the California State University in response to a letter dated April 26, 2002 from <br /> Ms. Setliff of the SJCEHD. The purpose of the proposed work is to further investigate the lateral and <br /> vertical extent of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in.groundwater at the site. As requested by the <br /> SJCEHD, the PAWP also included a remedial feasibility evaluation that compared_ and discussed remedial <br /> techniques for site remediation. <br /> Condor prepared a Soil and Groundwater Remediation Work Plan, dated March 3, 2003, at the request of <br /> Mr. David Rosso for the Trustees of the California State University. The scope of work described in this <br /> "work plan includes (1) groundwater dewatering with dewatering wells, groundwater.treatment, and proper <br /> disposal of treated groundwater; (2) soil over-excavation, including transport and disposal of <br /> contaminated soil; and(3) in-situ groundwater remediation utilizing ozone sparging technology. <br /> Nuel Henderson of the SJCEHD approved the PAWP in a letter dated March 27,, 2003. Mr. Henderson <br /> also approved the soil over-excavation portion of the Soil and Groundwater Remediation Work Plan as an <br /> interim remedial measure. However, Mr. Henderson also indicated that ozone sparging would not be <br /> considered by the SJCEHD until site characterization was complete. <br /> On March 13, 2003, a Condor representative was on site to measure water Ievels and collect water <br /> samples from the three monitor wells. A slight petroleum odor was noted in the field inspection samples <br /> collected from MW-2 and MW-3. The laboratory analytical results indicated that no petroleum <br /> hydrocarbon constituents were detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitor well MW-l. <br /> BTEX, TPH-G, total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as diesel and motor oil TPH-D MO and 1,2- <br /> DCA <br /> ( � ) , <br /> DCA were detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitor well MW-2. BTEX, TPH-G, total <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as diesel (TPH-D), MTBE, and 1,2-DCA were detected in the <br /> groundwater sample collected from monitor well MW-3 at concentrations generally consistent`with <br /> historical results. The groundwater gradient direction (southeast) was generally consistent with historical <br /> groundwater gradients. : <br /> On April 14 through.17,2003, Condor conducted an additional groundwater investigation at the site using <br /> direct push boring methods. Condor supervised the completion of five deep CPT boring pairs and one <br /> shallow hydropunch boring. Findings of the work were described in the Additional Groundwater <br /> Investigation Report, dated August 19, 2003, prepared by.Condor. Based on the .laboratory analytical <br /> results of the groundwater samples, the extent of groundwater contamination is adequately investigated <br /> up-gradient and cross-gradient at the site. In addition, all petroleum hydrocarbon constituents other:than <br /> TPH-D and 1,2-DCA (including BTEX and MTBE) are very limited in extent, laterally and vertically, in <br /> the down-gradient direction.Condor recommended the installation of additional monitor wells at the site <br /> to investigate and monitor deep groundwater in the source area and shallow and deep groundwater in the <br /> down-gradient portion of the site. Condor also reaffirmed its recommendation for soil over-excavation <br /> and ozone sparging in the source area. However, Condor recommended that any further work not be <br /> conducted at the site until the site disposition, relative to soil over-excavation and the demolition of the <br /> site structures, was decided. <br />