ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0010622 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Soli Sample Results-Tank Pit Excavation* Sample Date TPHG Benzene Toluene Et ben Xylene MTBE mc u u u u Stockpiles 8P#1 top north 500 ND NO No ND 29 no data SP#1 to center 5RIM ND ND 10 15 190 no data SP#1 top south 5x3199 NO NO ND ND 25 no data S P#2northend east 4r-'G% 11,100 980 19 000 21 000 110 000 220 SP#2northend west 4r30r99 540 210 2,400 5,300 30,000 ND SP#2southend west 4r OW 1,700 4,000 83 000 42 000 230 000 580 SP#2southend east 4!.30/99 3.500 5 000 71 000 68,000 400,000 2 700 AVERAGES 977 1 541 25 057 19 471 110 034 875 Tank Pit Tank Pit west 4f3nQ9 840 5,000 71,000 68,000 400,000 420 sidewall 9 S Tank Pit north 4x30139 1,140 900 3,000 22,000 16,000 1,100 sidewaii 10' South sidewall 10' 4r-40M2,200 5900 34 000 38 000 160,000 3,100 Bottom sample i 4/30199 1,200 3,000 3,700 28,000 60,000 2,000 12 5' East sidewall jIg 50199 1300 870 15,000 16 ODD 100.000 ND AVERAGES 1 328 3 134 25 340 34 400 147 200 1 324 Tank Pit Groundwater Results* Sample Date TPHG Benzene Toluene Eth ben X enes MTBE m u uqA ugA u uA Tank Pit Water 105 4r30/99 42 3 600 1,100 1 500 4 500 58 •-See Wright Letter dated October 8, 1999 to San Joaquin County Public Health Services The contaminant estimate calculations are presented with the following assumptions The averages from the soil data were used for soil and the tank pit water sample for groundwater which flooded the excavation The sod contaminant mass removed Is assumed from the stockpile numbers, (which as a result of aeration during excavation and stockpiling could have been significantly higher) and therefore are very conservative) the contaminant mass remaining is assumed from the tank pit sidewall and bottom samples in a capillary fringe 3-feet thick, 3-feet wide along the excavation perimeter these samples were from undisturbed soil and therefore are considered more reliable accurate Calculations used methods from Lyman, Reidy and Levy (1992)