SOIL GAS SURVEY FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS TARGET ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. TUT OOA 0392 *64582* 64582 SOIL GAS SURVEY FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA*8 RETREAT U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS PREPARED FOR LAW OFFICE OF JOHN K. DEMA, P.C. 1236 STRAND STREET, SUITE 103 CHRISTIANSTED, ST. CROIX, VIRGIN ISLANDS 00820-5008 PREPARED BY TARGET ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 9180 RUMSEY ROAD COLUMBIA, MARYLAND 21045 (410) 992-6622 FEBRUARY 1992 TUT OO6 0393 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On January 7 through 13, 1991, TARGET Environmental Services, Inc. (TARGET) conducted a soil gas survey at Four Winds Shopping Center and Environs, Tutu Area, Anna's Retreat, U.S. Virgin Islands, where petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbons have been detected in water supply wells. The samples were analyzed by GC/FID and GC/ECD for petroleum and chlorinated hydrocarbons. The highest levels of Total FID Volatiles were present on the Rodriguez Esso and this occurrence apparently extends some distance to the southeast. The highest hydrocarbon levels in the Four Winds Plaza area occurred at Tutu Esso. This occurrence appeared to have migrated northward beyond the pump islands into the shopping center parking lot. The FID chromatogram signatures of the samples with the highest levels of Total FID Volatiles from both Esso stations reveal a complex petroleum hydrocarbon fuel mixture. There was no evidence that contaminants from a reported occurrence on the Texaco property to the northeast have impacted the Four Winds Plaza property. The water supply wells at Four Winds Plaza are within the area of contamination associated with Tutu Esso. The water supply well on the Harthman property nearest location 166, appears to be at greatest risk of being impacted by the occurrence on the Rodriguez Esso. GC/ECD analysis revealed significant concentrations of tetra- chloroethene (PCE), cis-l,2-dichloroethene (c-l,2-DCE) and tri- chloroethene (TCE) in the northern portion of the Tutu Esso and beneath the Four Winds Plaza parking lot. No significant chlorinated hydrocarbons were detected on the Harthman and Rodriguez Esso properties. i TUT OO6 O394 Introduction The Law Office of John K. Dema, representing Four Winds Plaza, contracted TARGET Environmental Services, Inc. (TARGET) to perform a soil gas survey on a portion of the Four Winds Plaza property and on adjacent properties in the Tutu area, Anna's Retreat, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. The purpose of the soil gas survey was to help determine the source(s) of the hydrocarbons in the shopping center's water supply wells and to determine if water supply wells on the adjacent Harthman property were at similar risk. In 1983 and 1987, halogenated and non-halogenated hydrocarbons were discovered in water supply wells in the area. Subsequent soil gas surveys and water samples from the supply wells detected petroleum and halogenated hydrocarbons in the ground water at nearby Esso and Texaco service stations and beneath the shopping center parking lot. As a result, the Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources ordered that the supply wells be shut down. Site soils were reported to be permeable stratified sands, gravels and clays up to 20 feet thick over fractured bedrock. The ground water level fluctuates from a rainy season high of about 20 feet to a dry season low of about 90 feet. Regional flow is southward. The field phase of the soil gas survey was conducted on January 7 through 13, 1992. TUT OO6 O395 Detectability The soil gas survey data presented in this report are the result of precise sampling and measurement of contaminant concen- trations in the vadose zone. Analyte detection at a particular location is representative of vapor, dissolved, and/or liquid phase contamination at that location. The presence of detectable levels of target analytes in the vadose zone is dependent upon several factors, including the presence of vapor-phase hydrocarbons or dissolved or liquid concentrations adequate to facilitate volatil- ization into the unsaturated zone. TUT OO6 O396 Terminology In order to prevent misunderstanding of certain terms used in this report, the following clarifications are offered: The term "feature" is used in reference to a discernible pattern in the contoured data. It denotes a contour form rather than a definite or separate chemical occurrence. The term "occurrence" is used to indicate an area where chemical compounds are present in sufficient concentrations to be detected by the analysis of soil vapors. The term is not indica- tive of any specific mode of occurrence (vapor, dissolved, etc.), and does not necessarily indicate or suggest the presence of "free product" or "phase-separated hydrocarbons." The term "anomaly" refers to an area where hydrocarbons were measured in excess of what would normally be considered "natural" or "background" levels. The term "analyte" refers to any of the hydrocarbons standard- ized for quantification in the chromatographic analysis. The term "vadose zone" represents the unsaturated zone between the ground water table and the ground surface. The term "indicates" is used when evidence dictates a unique conclusion. The term "suggests" is used when several explanations of certain evidence are possible, but one in particular seems more likely. As a result, "indicates" carries a higher degree of confidence in a conclusion than does "suggests." The terms "elevated" and "significant" are used to describe concentrations of analytes which indicate the existence of a potential problem in the soil or ground water. 3 TUT OO6 O397 The terms "low", "moderate" and "high", when applied to Total FID Volatile petroleum hydrocarbons, are relative and subjective terms based on TARGET'S analysis of thousands of soil gas samples from hundreds of sites. Because site conditions and sampling techniques vary, specific action levels cannot be set for soil gas. Decisions regarding the necessity for further actions should be based upon comparisons of samples of soil or ground water with the regulatory action levels set for these media. TUT O06 O398 Field Procedures Soil gas samples were collected at a total of 169 locations at the site, as shown in Figure 1A and IB. Three proposed samples (Sample 24 from near the southeast corner of Western Auto, Sample 47 from southeast of the car wash, and Sample 168 from south of Gasset Auto) could not be collected due to the presence of very shallow ground water. Several samples were collected shallower than the proposed 4 feet due to probe refusal (see Table 1). Sample 172 was collected from a monitoring well located between the building on the Tutu Esso and the adjacent car wash. To collect the samples a 1/2 inch hole was produced to a depth of approximately 4 feet by using a drive rod. Where pavement or concrete was present, a rotary hammer was employed for penetration prior to using the drive rod. The entire sampling system was purged with ambient air drawn through an organic vapor filter cartridge, and a stainless steel probe was inserted to the full depth of the hole and sealed off from the atmosphere. A sample of in-situ soil gas was then withdrawn through the probe and used to purge atmospheric air from the sampling system. A second sample of soil gas was withdrawn through the probe and encapsulated in a pre-evacuated glass vial at two atmospheres of pressure (15 psig). The self-sealing vial was detached from the sampling system, packaged, labeled, and stored for laboratory analysis. Prior to the day's field activities all sampling equipment, slide hammer rods and probes were decontaminated by washing with soapy water and rinsing thoroughly. Internal surfaces were flushed TUT OO6 O399 dry using pre-purified nitrogen or filtered ambient air, and external surfaces were wiped clean using clean paper towels. Field control samples were collected at the beginning and end of each day's field activities and after every twentieth soil gas sample. These QA/QC samples were obtained by filtering ambient air through a dust and organic vapor filter cartridge and collecting in the same manner as described above. The volatile petroleum hydrocarbons reported in Field Control Samples 210 and 213 are the result of carryover in the sampling equipment following the collection of Samples 106 and 146, respectively, which contained high levels of volatile hydrocarbons. The very low levels of volatile hydrocarbons reported in Field Control Samples 214, 215 and 216 are most likely the result of minor carryover, but the levels are insufficient to have influenced the survey results. A very low level of tetrachloroethene (PCE) was present in Field Control Sample 202. This sample was collected following Sample 20, which contained a moderate amount of PCE. Field Control Sample 202 was the last blank of the day and the blank collected as the first sample the next morning did not contain detectable levels of PCE. TUT OO6 O4OO Laboratory Procedures All of the samples collected during the field phase of the survey were subjected to dual analyses. One analysis was conducted according to EPA Method 601 (modified) on a gas chromatograph equipped with an electron capture detector (BCD), but using direct injection instead of purge and trap. Specific analytes standardized for this analysis were: 1,1-dichloroethene (11DCE) methylene chloride (CH2C12) trans-1,2-dichloroethene (t!2DCE) 1,1-dichloroethane (11DCA) cis-1,2-dichloroethene (C12DCE) chloroform (CHC13) 1.1.1-trichloroethane (111TCA) carbon tetrachloride (CC14) trichloroethene (TCE) 1.1.2-trichloroethane (112TCA) tetrachloroethene (PCE) The chlorinated hydrocarbons in this suite were chosen because of their common usage in industrial solvents, and/or their degrada- tional relationship to commonly used compounds. The second analysis was conducted according to EPA Method 602 (modified) on a gas chromatograph equipped with a flame ionization detector (FID), but using direct injection instead of purge and trap. The analytes selected for standardization in this analysis were: methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) benzene toluene ethylbenzene meta- and para- xylene ortho-xylene These compounds were chosen because of their utility in evaluating the presence of fuel products, or petroleum based solvents. TUT OO6 0401 The analytical equipment was calibrated using an instrument- response curve and injection of known concentrations of the above standards. Retention times of the standards were used to identify the peaks in the chromatograms of the field samples and their response factors were used to calculate the analyte concentrations. The Total FID Volatiles values were generated by summing the areas of all chromatogram peaks and calculated using the instrument response factor for toluene. Injection peaks, which also contain the light hydrocarbon methane, were excluded to avoid the skewing of the Total FID Volatiles values due to injection disturbances and biogenic methane. For samples with low hydrocarbon concentrations, the calculated Total FID Volatiles concentration is occasionally lower than the sum of the individual analytes. This is because the response factor used for the Total FID Volatiles calculation is a constant, whereas the individual analyte response factors vary with concentration. It is important to understand that the Total FID Volatiles levels reported are relative, not absolute, values. The tabulated results of the laboratory analyses of the soil gas samples are reported in micrograms per liter (M9/1) in Tables 2 and 3. Although "micrograms per liter" is equivalent to "parts per billion (v/v)" in water analyses, they are not equivalent in gas analyses, due to the difference in the mass of equal volumes of water and gas matrices. Because pentane and MTBE co-elute, they are listed together in the table. The xylenes concentrations reported in Table 2 are the sum of the m- and p-xylene and o-xylene concentrations for each sample. o TUT OO6 0402 For QA/QC purposes, a duplicate analysis was performed on every tenth field sample. Laboratory blanks of nitrogen gas (99.999%) were also analyzed after every tenth field sample. TUT O06 O4O~:, Discussion and Interpretation of Results In order to provide graphic presentation of the results, selected individual data sets in Tables 2 and 3 have been mapped and contoured to produce Figures 2 through 12. The contour lines show areas where concentrations are of similar magnitude. The limits of the soil gas survey do not necessarily outline the exact edges of a potential ground water or soil plume which acts as a source of the vapors. However, areas of highest concentration and relative highs and lows are clearly exhibited in the soil gas data and the data will reflect conditions in the subsurface at each sample point. Dashed contours are used where patterns are extra- polated into areas of less complete data, or as auxiliary contours. Map sample points with no data shown indicate that the analyte concentrations in the sample were below the detection limit. The survey area was divided into two parts: the first part is the area including and surrounding the parking lot of the Four Winds Plaza and Tutu Esso. The second part includes the Harthman Property, Rodriguez Esso and vicinity. Four Winds Plaza and Tutu Esso Area Observations The highest levels of Total FID Volatiles from the Tutu Esso and adjacent areas (Figure 2) occurred between the building and the tank area on the Esso site (Stations 105 and 106). Significantly elevated levels are also present north of the pump islands (Stations 95 and 97) . Low levels extend northward into the Four Hinds Plaza parking lot and are present south of the car wash. 10 TUT OO6 O4O4 Isolated very low levels typical of background concentrations were evident at a few other scattered locations. Map patterns for MTBE/pentane (Figure 3) are similar to, but less extensive than, those of Total FID Volatiles. Benzene (Figure 4) was detected only on the Esso site. The toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes occurrences, as exemplified by the xylenes map (Figure 5), are similar. These analytes are at their highest concentrations in Sample 105, and the occurrences extend northward beyond the pump islands. The FID chromatogram signatures of the samples from the TuTu Esso reveal a complex petroleum hydrocarbon fuel mixture, as exemplified by Chromatogram 1, Sample 105. Isolated peaks representing the FID response to chlorinated compounds are present in the signatures of several samples from the parking lot, shown by Chromatogram 2, Sample 18. CHROMATOGRAM 1. GC/FID SIGNATURE OF SAMPLE 105 ;;.| Cl s: ••/» «: ............. .................................................. . ... IROMATOGRAM 2. GC/FID CGNATURE OF SAMPLE 18 The xylenes are less volatile and less soluble than the other analytes, adsorb more readily to the soil particles, and tend to remain nearer to the source. As a result, the xylenes are usually 11 TUT 006 0405 good indicators of source locations. The xylene map patterns suggest that the hydrocarbons entered the subsurface near the center of the Esso site. The occurrence south of the car wash (Stations 51-53) may have originally been continuous with the occurrence on the Esso station. Soil venting during excavation activities which took place when the car wash was built is probably responsible for the absence of volatile hydrocarbons in samples at and immediately south of the car wash. GC/ECD analysis of the samples from the Tutu Esso/Four Winds Plaza area revealed tetrachloroethene (PCE, Figure 6) to be the most widespread halogen. The highest level was present near the northern boundary of the Tutu Esso (Station 35) and comparable levels extend northward into the parking lot. Lower levels were present throughout most of the remainder of the surveyed area. Slight increases in concentration were observed northwest of the paint store (Station 61) and in the northern portion of the parking lot (Station 10) . Elevated levels of cis-1,2-dichloroethene (c-l,2-DCE, Figure 7) and trichloroethene (TCE, Figure 8) were present in the same area with the highest levels of PCE. TCE was highest north of the pump islands on the Esso site (Station 97) , but its overall extent was much more limited than the PCE. Relatively low levels of trans-1,2-dichloroethene (t-l,2-DCE) were present in the northern portion of the Esso site and in a small area of the parking lot to the north. An isolated low level of 1,1-dichloro- ethene (1,1-DCE, not mapped) was present in one sample north of the pump islands and very low levels of 1,1,1-trichloroethane (1,1,1- 12 TUT 006 O4O6 TCA, not mapped) were present in a few samples adjacent to the building on the Esso site. Conclusions Map patterns and chromatographic data indicate that petroleum hydrocarbons have entered the subsurface at the Tutu Esso and have subsequently migrated northward beyond the pump islands. Xylene map patterns suggest that the source for the occurrence is clearly associated with the Esso facility. There is no evidence that contaminants from a reported release on the Texaco property northeast of the Four Winds Plaza have impacted the survey area. GC/ECD analysis indicates that significant concentrations of PCE, c-l,2-DCE and TCE and lesser occurrences of t-l,2-DCE, 1,1,1- TCA and 1,1-DCE are present in the northern portion of the Tutu Esso and beneath the Pour Winds Plaza parking lot. The PCE occurrence extends throughout most of the survey area, while c-l,2-DCE and TCE were detectable only on the northern portion of the Tutu Esso and beneath the adjacent Four Winds Plaza parking lot. The DCE and TCA were likely minor components of original PCE or TCE solvent mixtures or they may be breakdown products formed when the original compound(s) underwent chemical transformation in the subsurface. While no specific source point is evident, the contour patterns do not support a source outside the immediate area of occurrence. 13 TUT 006 O4O7 Rodricruez Esso and Harthman property Observations The Total FID Volatiles map for this area (Figure 10) reveals high levels near the pump islands/tank area and near the building on the Esso site. The occurrence (s) extend throughout the Rodriguez site with very low levels continuing northward to the dirt road. Very low levels are also present adjacent to the road south of the Lutheran Church and along a dirt road leading from Route 38 to the water tanks. The concentration gradients on the Rodriguez site are very steep, indicating limited lateral migration in the vadose zone. The standardized petroleum analytes were present only on the Esso site. Map patterns for MTBE/pentane (Figure 11) were similar to, but slightly less extensive than those of Total FID Volatiles. Benzene (not mapped) was limited to two samples between the building and the pump islands/tank area. Map patterns for toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes were similar and are represented by the xylenes map (Figure 12). The FID chromatogram signatures of the samples from the Rodriguez Esso site with the highest levels of Total FID Volatiles are similar to those described previously for the Tutu Esso. GC/ECD analysis of the samples from this area revealed only isolated very low levels of chloroform, c-l,2-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA and PCE in one or two samples and the occurrences were not mapped. TUT OO6 04OS 14 Conclusions Map patterns and chromatographic data suggest that petroleum hydrocarbons entered the subsurface at the Rodriguez Esso. The high level of volatile hydrocarbons observed adjacent to Route 38 suggests that this occurrence extends beyond the property boundary to the southeast. Xylene map patterns for this site are also consistent with a source associated with the tanks, pumps and lines. The very low levels of volatile hydrocarbons observed in Samples 107 to 111 on the Harthman property are of the magnitude which could typically result from truck traffic on the dirt road between the water tanks and Route 38. The Harthman water supply well located near sampling location 166 is at greatest risk of being impacted by the occurrence on the Rodriguez Esso. The very low levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons observed at isolated scattered locations in this survey area do not suggest the presence of significant chlorinated hydrocarbon contamination. There is no evidence of significant PCE contamination entering this area from O1 Henry Cleaners (or any other source) to the east across Route 38 from the Lutheran Church. 15 TUT O06 0409 TABLE 1 SAMPLING DEPTH SAMPLE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13U 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 FEET 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.5 4 3 4 3 3.5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 2 SAMPLE 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 FEET 4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.5 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3.5 4 16 TUT O06 O41O SAMPLE 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 TABLE 1 (cont) SAMPLING DEPTH FEET 3 3.5 3 3 3.5 2.5 4 4 4 4 3.5 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.5 3 4 4 4 4 2.5 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 SAMPLE_________________________FEET 138 139 140 140 141 142 142 143 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 169 170 171 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 TUT 006 O411 17 TABLE 2 ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/FID (M9/O ETHYL- TOTAL FID SAMPLE________MTBE________BENZENE_______TOLUENE_______BENZENE________XYLEMES______VOLATILES 3 23 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 38 5 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 7 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 9 2,1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6.9 11 9.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 21 12 *1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 ^1 «0 ^1.0 13 *1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 ^1 »0 <1.0 14 <1»0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 < 15 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 16 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 18 8.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 13 19 *1 »0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 5.6 20 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6.6 21 6.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 14 23 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 25 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.0 26 4.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 18 27 4,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.9 29 1.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.4 30 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.1 71 31 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 32 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 34 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.2 35 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .-0 8.0 36 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.1 37 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.2 38 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.3 39 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 40 8.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6.2 41 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 43 1.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.2 44 2.8 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.4 45 *1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 *1.0 46 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 *1.0 <1.0 48 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1»0 <1 »0 *1.0 49 *1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1«0 <1.0 < 51 134 <1.0 4.2 1.7 <1.0 222 53 3.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 11 58 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 59 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 CALCULATED USING THE SUM OF THE AREAS OF ALL INTEGRATED CHROMATOGRAM PEAKS AND THE INSTRUMENT RESPONSE FACTOR FOR TOLUENE 18 TUT OO6 041 SAMPLE TABLE 2 Ccont) ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/FID (M9/D NTBE BENZENE TOLUENE ETHYL- BENZENE XTLENES TOTAL FID WDLATILES1 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 106 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 1.1 •0.0 •0.0 7.0 678 1.341 68 6.2 209 6.8 319 128 17,650 8,901 12 2.3 485 57 19 46 44 6.1 6.0 197 58 6.5 6.4 17 7.3 1.2 594 105 6.4 6.6 103 18 2.3 290 52 1.9 2.2 1.0 1.4 1.1 1.4 9.3 1,930 10 5,146 144 35 525 11 762 918 52.100 51.080 1.7 2.3 1.3 9.2 2.1 1.5 'CALCULATED USING THE SUM OF THE AREAS OF ALL INTEGRATED CHROMATOGRAM PEAKS AND THE INSTRUMENT RESPONSE FACTOR FOR TOLUENE 19 O06 O413 TABLE 2 Ccont) SAMPLE 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 169 170 171 172 MTBE <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 31,840 290 3.5 1.9 188 51 144 590 35,730 49 1.6 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 4.7 <1.0 <1.0 14 ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/FID (M9/O ETHYL- TOTAL FID BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES VOLATILES <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 *1.0 <1 .0 *1 .0 ^1.0 <1.0 *1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 <1 .0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1 .0 ^1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 *1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 <1 .0 ^1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 9.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.7 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 5.3 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1 .0 8.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 1.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 325 245 772 228.400 6.9 3.3 1.4 6.2 1.008 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 18 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 8.2 <1.0 7.7 5.2 8.5 2,083 < 1 . 0 < 1 . 0 < 1 • 0 < 1 • 0 263 <1.0 8.6 1.2 1.1 804 16 2.0 13 2.8 930 <1.0 377 82 259 515,000 <1.0 107 9.7 30 870 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 9.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 11 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 1.7 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 .4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 .2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 .2 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 .1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 .6 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 7.5 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 5.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 21 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.5 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 2.7 18 CALCULATED USING THE SUM OF THE AREAS OF ALL INTEGRATED CHROMATOGRAM PEAKS AND THE INSTRUMENT RESPONSE FACTOR FOR TOLUENE 20 TUT OO6 O414 TABLE 2 icontl ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/FID Otg/l) ETHYL- TOTAL FID SAMPLE________MTBE_______BENZENE_______TOLUENE________BENZENE_______XYLENES_____VDLATILES FIELD CONTROL SAMPLES 201 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 202 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 «0 <1.0 <1.0 203 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 < 1 » 0 <1.0 <1.0 204 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 < 1 » 0 205 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 206 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 207 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 208 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 209 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 210 5.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 10 211 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 212 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 213 4.9 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 57 214 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.2 215 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1-8 216 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1-4 LABORATORY DUPLICATE ANALYSES 10 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.6 10R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.6 20 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6.6 20R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 6.5 31 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 31R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 41 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 <1.0 <1.0 1.7 41R <1.0 <1.0 1.6 <1.0 <1.0 1.9 52 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 15 52R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 15 66 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 66R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 78 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 78R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 88 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 88R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 98 68 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 144 98R 67 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 145 116 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 116R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 126 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 136R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1CALCULATED USING THE SUM OF THE AREAS OF ALL INTEGRATED CHROMATOCRAM PEAKS AND THE INSTRUMENT RESPONSE FACTOR FOR TOLUENE 21 TUT 006 0415 TABLE 2 Ccont) ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/FID (ftg/l) ETHYL- TOTAL FID SAMPLE________MTBE________BENZENE______TOLUENE________BENZENE_______XYLEMES______VOLATILES1 LABORATORY DUPLICATE ANALYSES (cont) 146 35.730 <1.0 377 82 259 515,000 146R 35,650 <1.0 376 81 259 511,100 170 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.5 170R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 3.4 214 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2. 214R <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.9 LABORATORY BLANKS 10B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 20B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 31B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 41B <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 52B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 *O.0 <1.0 66B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 *1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 788 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 888 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 988 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 116B <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 136B < 1 « 0 <1.0 <1.0 *1.0 <1.0 ^ 1468 <1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1 *0 ^1.0 ^1.0 1708 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2058 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 2098 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2148 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 < 1 CALCULATED USING THE SUM OF THE AREAS OF ALL INTEGRATED CHROMATOGRAM PEAKS AND THE INSTRUMENT RESPONSE FACTOR FOR TOLUENE 22 TUT OO6 O4.16 TABLE 3 ANALYTE CONCENTRATIONS VIA GC/ECO (M9/D SAMPLE 11DCE CHoClo I12DCE 11DCA cIZDCE CHCU 111TCA CCl. TCE 112TCA PCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 11DCE t12DCE cIZDCE 111TCA TCE PCE <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 2.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ^1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 = 1,1-dichlorocthene = trans-1, 2-dichloroethene = cis-1, 2-dichloroethene = 1,1,1-trich I oroethane = trichloroethene = tetrach loroethene <1 0 <1.0 1.6 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 aQ ^/if ^-2^ GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANUAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART GALLERY TEXACO PROPERTY FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) O MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. Jhis mop is integral to a written report and should be viewed in thd context FIGURE 2. Total FID Volatiles (calc'd nq/\) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TUT 006 0424 BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION STATE ROAD 38 GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY VITELCO BUILDING LOCATION OF ANMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART6A11ERY 68 FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) O MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. FIGURE 3. Pentane/Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) Ibis mop is integral to G written report ond should be viewed 'm that context. FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT 006 0425 BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION L «::::,:: .mTO j, + ^ • 98 • 1 * _?n M * 30 GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY APPROXMA1E LOCATION OF AMMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART GALLERY FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) 0 MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. Ihis mop is integral to a written report | and should be viewed in that context FIGURE 4. Benzene (jig/I) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT OO6 0426 FOUR WINDS PLAZA BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION RETAINING WALL STATE ROAD 38 GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY 60 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANIMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ARTGAU£RY FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) «• MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. INC. FIGURE 5. Xytenes (>g/l) Ihis mop is integral to a written report and should be viewed 'm that context. FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT OO6 O427 BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY LOCATION OF ANIMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART GALLERY FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) •O MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. INC. This mop is integral to a written report and should be viewed in that context. FIGURE 6, Tetrachloroethene (PCE) Gig/0 FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT 006 0428 FOUR WINDS PLAZA BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION EXCAVATED TANK AREA RETAINING WALL STATE ROAD 38 GRACE TUTU GOSPa CHAPEL PROPERTY VITELCO BUILDING 60 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANIMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART GALLERY 68 TEXACO PROPERTY FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) •0 MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. This mop is integral to a written report and should be viewed in that context. FIGURE 7. cis-1,2-dichloroethene (c-1,2-DCE) 0*9/0 FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TUT 006 042.9 FOUR WINDS PLAZA BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION RETAINING WALL VITELCO BUILDING APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANIMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ARTGAUERY M GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY 40 80 FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) O MONITORING WELL + WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. This mop is integral to a written report and should be viewed in that context. FIGURE 8. Trichloroethene (TCE) 0*9/1) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT 006 0430 FOUR WINDS PLAZA BRUSH AND THICK VEGETATION STATE ROAD 38 VITELCO BUILDING 60 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANIMAL HOSPITAL APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ART GALLERY GRACE TUTU GOSPEL CHAPEL PROPERTY 40 80 FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) O MONITORING WELL 4 WATER SUPPLY WELL OUTLINE OF ESSO PROPERTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. Ibis map is integral to a written report and should be viewed 'm that context. FIGURE 9. trans-1,2-dichloroethene (t-1,2-DCE) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TEXACO PROPERTY TUT 006 0431 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 0*HENRY DRY CLEANERS FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) + WATER SUPPLY WELL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. The mop h M«p/d to a irittoi report did short be viewed in thai context TUTU iXURCH OF GOO PROPERTY FIGURE 10. Total FID Volatiles (calc'd /ig/l) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND EN'/IRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TUT 04" APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF O'HENRY DRY CLEANERS FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) + WATER SUPPLY WELL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. INC. This mop is intend to o fritter report ond should be Meted in that context TUTU CHURCH OF GOD PROPERTY X.730 pUMp 15-- ISLANDS FIGURE 11 Pentane/Methy Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) 0*9/0 FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TUT OO6 O433 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF 0"HENRY DRY CLEANERS FEET • SOIL GAS SAMPLE LOCATION o NOT SAMPLED (UNCOLLECTABLE) + WATER SUPPLY WELL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. INC. Ihb mop is Wegrd to o fritten report and should be viewed n that contort. TUTU CHURCH OF GOO PROPERTY FIGURE 12. Xylenes (>g/|) FOUR WINDS SHOPPING CENTER AND ENVIRONS TUTU AREA, ANNA'S RETREAT UNITED STATES VIRGIN ISLANDS TUT OO 6 4