ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012640 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

l t R IM These tests are viewed as important t-y the writer owing; to the fact that radial drainage of water into the pit through essentially flat- lying beds should give a more re presentative sample of formation water than samples from relatively isolated mz)nitoring wells . if an infiltration plume existed, lying; in an attitude that precluded detection by testing water from the monitoring wells , it should be detected in the pit seepage. Also drainage volume of the surrounding reservoir , when compared to the small amount of water recovered from a monitoring well , is enormous . The fact that these tests are on "mingled" formation water is an advantage rather than a disadvantage. Industrial Wells On July 26, 1989 water samples were collected from the three in- dustrial wells under the direct observation of the DHS. IW-1 is located at the east edge of the excavation and IW-2 and IW-3 are located southwesterly about 60 ' to 75 ' from the excavation ( Fig. 6 and Appendix A- 12 map) . EPA current method 602 was used to test for BTEX and GCFID 5030, as specified by the DHS, to test for TVPH. No hydrocarbons -r-re found above the testing limits . These data are surrtmied on Table C. Soil Smples On July 31 , 1989, CES and JTO, witnessed by the DHS representa- tive, collected samples at 13 locations around and in the deep excvation and 16 samples from the sidewalls, 4 each from the north, south, east and west . These samples were taken from the approximate depths of -40 ' , -35 ' , -30 ' and -25 ' , g. l . All samples were approximately located as approved by Diane Hinson, Appendix 14. All soil samples were collected by pushing laboratory Supp- lied 2" X 6" brass sleeves into the soil . Standard collection procedures as listed above were Used. The instructions given to the laboratory, as agreed to by the DHS, ( stated by JTO) , was to analyze samples one through thirteen for BTEX and TEH, rising current EPA methods S020 and GCFID 5030, and 5015, GCFID 3550. For the sidewall samples above pit bottom; that is, N-S-E-W, labeled as follows, A at -401 , B ut -351 , C at -30 ' and D at -25' ; the upper ones were to be analyzed only if the lower sample (A) showed contamination. All of the "A" samples were negative at the limits of detection and B, C, and D samples were not analyzed. - - --- _.__ -DISCUSSION ...- .. contamination in small amounts ,vas foundinonly three of the ' samples from the pit botton. Nos . 8, 10 and 11 . The amounts were small , the highest being No. 11 , from near Pit center. No. ll . had a TEH of 52 mg/kg and Xylene detectable at . 35 mg/kg (':able B-1 ) . 9