WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

inside the Transmission Shop. A Geoprobe (push drill) was used to secure the samples, five with the drill vertical, one with the drill angle 24° from the vertical, and one 18° from the vertical. Bore hole locations are shown on Figure 4 from the Work Plan, included here for clarity. The sample tubes were capped, labeled and placed in an iced chest for transport, under chain of custody, to Precision Enviro-Tech Iaboratory for analysis. Bore holes were filled with cement grout. The push drill did not produce any cuttings. This work was completed on March 6 208 under oversight p � by Margaret Lagorio from the San Joaquin County Environment)I Health Department. The Work Plan called for six soil samples at variou depths below the tank, and one groundwater sample. It proved impossible to secure the groundwater sample, as the very t dense soil at 44 to 48 ft. depth, could not be penetrated with the geoprobe equipment employed. An extra soil sample from this very dense layer was taken instead. 4.0 Analytical Results Analytical results are summarized in Table 1. Data from the sampling conducted on 2126107 are included in this summary (italicized)to present the full picture. Laboratory reports are included in Appendix A. 5.0 Discussion and Recommendations Analytical data are also shown on the attached sketch, which gives the relative locations of the samples and lists the contaminant levels for diesel and total VOCs for each. This shows that contaminant levels generally decrease with depth. This is further illustrated in the graphs of Diesel Contamination vs Depth for B 1 & B2 and for B3, attached. A review of the data presented suggests that the contamination is relatively immobile (tank closed 20 years ago),primarily concentrated n�ar the bottom of the tank. In addition, there is a very dense layer of soil at a dept of 45 to 48 ft., which could not be penetrated by the push drill, which will surely provide protection for the ground water. 2