Laserfiche WebLink
S134 into a 2-inch diameter groundwater monitoring well (PT-MW1). Soil samples were <br /> collected at five foot intervals from each of the soil borings and field screened for volatile <br /> organic compounds using a photoionization detection (PID). <br /> Relatively low but positive PID readings were reportedly recorded by Applied GeoSystems on <br /> the log of soil boring for PT-S133 throughout most of the boring. The highest PID reading from <br /> PT-S133 was recorded at a depth of 20 feet bgs. Although the upper portion (0 to approximately <br /> 25 feet bgs) of soil boring PT-SB4 recorded background level PID readings,the highest recorded <br /> PID reading was recorded in boring PT-S134 at approximately the groundwater surface(40 feet <br /> bgs). <br /> None of the soil samples collected from PT-SB 1 to S134 were reportedly submitted for <br /> quantitative analysis to a state certified laboratory (Applied Geosystems, Inc., 1988). <br /> Soil boring PT-S134 was reportedly advanced to approximately 60 feet bgs and completed as <br /> monitoring well PT-MW 1. Prior to development of monitoring well PT-MW 1, Applied <br /> GeoSystems reportedly observed a petroleum sheen on water that was removed from the well. <br /> The sheen was later reportedly observed prior to pre-sampling purging of PT-MW 1. Upon <br /> attempting to sample PT-MW 1 Applied GeoSystems reportedly measured an immiscible product <br /> layer of approximately Y2 inch(0.05 foot)thickness. A sample of this immiscible layer was not <br /> submitted for analysis to a state certified analytical laboratory. <br /> In April 1991. Mr. Ganzer(Ganzer and Williams)reportedly retained Falcon Energy and <br /> Geological Audit Services, Inc. to further define the extent of groundwater impact by petroleum <br /> hydrocarbons at the site. In May 1991, Geological Audit Services (GAS) supervised the <br /> installation of two additional 4-inch diameter monitor wells (PT-MW2 and PT-MW3, Figure 6). <br /> Soil samples were reportedly collected at five foot intervals from each of the soil borings from <br /> depths ranging from 10 to 45 feet bgs. <br /> Field observations during the drilling of PT-MW2 reportedly indicated the potential presence of <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons from approximately 45 feet bgs to the total depth of 60 feet bgs. Field <br /> p Y pp Y g <br /> - potential presence of petroleum <br /> observations encountered while drilling PT MW3 indicated the po p <br /> hydrocarbons starting from a depth of approximately 20 feet to total depth of 60 feet bgs. The 30, <br /> 35, 40, and 45 foot soil samples from each of the wells were submitted for quantitative analysis <br /> eth lbenzene. and x <br /> of TPH-g and benzene,toluene, lene BTEX b y y ( ) Y USEPA Test Methods <br /> 8015M and 8020, respectively. Each of the soil samples reportedly contained detectable <br /> concentrations of the requested analytes. The 40 foot bgs soil sample from PT-MW2 had the <br /> highest concentration of petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil with a laboratory reported <br /> concentration of TPH-g (880 mg/kg) and BTEX (9.2, 45, 14 and 77 mg/kg, respectively) <br /> (Geological Audit Services, 1991). <br /> In June 1991, GAS surveyed the wells relative to a temporary benchmark and measured the <br /> depth to the groundwater surface. GAS reported measured product layers of 6.125 and 7.25 <br /> inches in monitoring wells PT-MW 1 and PT-MW2, respectively. GAS did not report observing <br /> Parmar\Site Assessment Workplan\02152018.wpd 4 <br />