Laserfiche WebLink
• 4 2 TPH-D in Soil <br /> Table 3 presents the results of TPH-D analyses conducted on four soil samples collected <br /> during installation of monitoring wells DMW-6 and DMW-7 The two wells were <br /> intentionally placed in the locations of the former USTs where maximum TPH-D <br /> concentrations would be anticipated, based on previous studies <br /> Diesel was only reported in sample DMW-6 1 (18,000 mg/kg), which was collected from a <br /> depth of 25 feet bgs TPH-D was not reported in the other three samples, which were <br /> sampled at depths of 30, 35, and 40 feet bgs The reported concentration and sampling <br /> depth correspond to previous site assessments, which suggest that residual contamination is <br /> present at depths up to 26 feet bgs (Dames & Moore, 1995a) The groundwater level at the <br /> time of sampling was approximately 39 feet bgs, suggesting that an unsaturated zone <br /> approximately 13 feet thick separates the groundwater from impacted soil TPH-D was not <br /> reported in soil samples collected from depths of 40 feet to 30 feet bgs <br /> 4 3 TPH-D in Groundwater <br /> TPH-D groundwater results for samples collected between 1988 and 1998 are compiled in <br /> Table 4 TPH-D has not been reported in previous groundwater analyses TPH-D was <br /> reported at a concentration of 0 48 mg/L in one sample collected at DMW-6 on <br /> December 21, 1998 <br /> i <br /> Unknown hydrocarbon was reported for samples MW-7 (0 18 mg/L) and its duplicate MW- <br /> 0 (0 11 mg/L), collected at DMW-7 on December 21, 1998 The unknown hydrocarbon <br /> was reported to represent an unknown mixture in the range of n-C10 to n-C40, which did <br /> not match the diesel fuel reference Review of historical data indicates that unknown <br /> hydrocarbon has only been reported in one sample at a concentration of 0 18 mg/L in a <br /> sample collected at DMW-4 on May 13, 1994 <br /> Comparison of water level elevations with top of screen elevations (see Table 2, page 2) <br /> indicates that the monitoring well screens have been situated below the groundwater <br /> surface since at least May 1994 for DMW-1, DMW-2 and DMW-4 Well screens at DMW-3 <br /> and DMW-5 have been situated below the water table since at least May 1995 and January <br /> 1997, respectively However, a total of 25 groundwater samples were collected at dates <br /> when the well screen intersected the groundwater surface TPH-D was not reported in any <br /> of these 25 samples <br /> 6 11DM SACl\SYS1JOBWFPIREPORT1lgrpt doc <br />