Laserfiche WebLink
a) <br /> N <br /> The mass of hydrocarbon in the subsurface was estimated by considering the distribution of <br /> hydrocarbon in soil A rough, but conservative estimate of the hydrocarbon load in each area is <br /> presented in the following discussion <br /> The western soil contamination area is essentially an ellipse with an area of about 530 sq feet <br /> Assuming that the soil from 0 to 60 feet in this area contains an average of 3,100 mg/kg TPH <br /> (average of maximum concentrations), the mass of hydrocarbon in this zone is 10,800 Lbs The <br /> area of contamination near the former underground tanks is considered to be an ellipse with an <br /> area of 900 sq R Assuming the soil from 0 to 30 feet contains an average concentration of 4,000 <br /> mg/kg, the total mass in the upper zone is 11,880 lbs Assuming the soil from 30 to 60 feet <br /> contains an average concentration of 1,300 mg/kg, the total mass in the deeper zone is 3,860 lbs <br /> The total hydrocarbon load in this area is therefore 15,740 lbs <br /> The area of well TB3 is the third area of significant soil contamination and is estimated to be a <br /> cylinder 15 feet in diameter and 35 feet deep If the hydrocarbon concentration in the soil is 1,000 <br /> • mg/kg from 0 to 20 feet, the mass in the upper zone is 390 lbs The lower zone from 20-35 feet is <br /> assumed to have a TPH concentration of 5,000 mg/kg, indicating a load of 1,460 lbs , or 1,850 <br /> lbs total within the cylinder Based on these calculations, a total of approximately 29,000 lbs of <br /> hydrocarbon is present in the soil <br /> Note All of the above calculations assume a soil density of 110 lbs/cubic foot These <br /> calculations provide an estimate of the hydrocarbon load in the subsurface soils and may be used <br /> as a guide to monitor the progress of a remediation effort However, it must be recognized that <br /> this is only a rough estimate based on several reasonable assumptions The actual hydrocarbon <br /> load in the soils could differ dramatically from this estimate <br /> I <br /> Page 4 <br />