Laserfiche WebLink
r ; 4, . <br />'L'.. ,� w�; �<Sk .?5;".:'_ ,,'..:t 2 - ,� '„f"p„'�y�..±ryX^'_trf.SS.� ,e -.N ,'�.1„� U� a 3'-�i r •"`' r u1 Ly,�r aR,r '� '/''tet_” 1' AYe7 U-t., e., :�['' <br />�. s+� �t! >�.�' .ir� ,,t. ...,.-?t. wJ�'''Pi-{'-8�"..tp 4..���_:� .{.:-^"•,,.,.._i -.r, -,Sr�f' �"r�'r„ � �:ar .,;�"+k. �,: �C' µl�ii„1«� y�r ��i�y¢4^'.., <br /> h. <br /> f <br /> s� <br /> Y <br /> f-\P-j-U\5130\tylm.rcp <br /> } <br /> A A <br /> 7 <br /> s 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> Analytical results from sail samples taken from the former tank area indicate that the <br /> overexcavation activities at the Thomas Yard were successful in removing soil cont in <br /> hydrocarbons. Results of soil baring TB-1 indicate that hydrocarbons have not migrated <br /> ? from the former tank area into the soil beneath the buildin& Because the water table is <br /> t approximately 60 feet hnneath the deepest hydrocarbons found in the soil, ground water <br /> beneath the site has probably not been affected. <br /> "17 ` <br /> FSE recommends this site for case cln�mre pending the removal or remediation of the <br /> ff� approximately 800 cubic yards of soil containing hydrocarbons taken from the excavation <br /> I and stock-piled on site. Several soil disposition options are being considered, including: <br /> ¢ 1) Land-farming on site <br /> { 2) Chemical (hydrogen peroxide) treatment on site <br /> 3) Class II or Class III landfill disposal <br /> .. S <br /> T Cost, hydroc ar n concentration level, availah;e space on site, and San Joaquin CtiLfn <br /> regulations ure some of the factors involved in choosing the best disposal option <br /> I FSE will dismss these Options with Delta Truck and San Joaquin County regulatory <br /> official& <br /> t <br /> 6 <br /> i <br /> t <br /> F <br /> t <br /> F <br />