Laserfiche WebLink
CLOSURE REQUEST 5-31-94 <br /> UC DAVIS, short coarse:_ gROUNDWATER <br /> TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES, June 6, 1989. <br /> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region <br /> 9, VLEACH A ONE-DIMENSIONAL FINITE DIFFERENCE <br /> VADOSE ZONE LEACHING MODEL version 1 . 02 <br /> prepared by CH2M Hill, Redding California 1 <br /> August 1990 . <br /> Water Project Authority of the State of <br /> California, Goodwin J. Knight, Governor, <br /> INVESTIGATION OF THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOA UIN <br /> DELTA REPORT NO. 1 GROUND WATER GEOLOGY. <br /> May 1956 . <br /> SITE CHARACTERISTICS <br /> 1. Gasoline range hydrocarbon leakage was evident upon <br /> excavating for tank removal Petroleum odors were emitting from <br /> the excavation and, UST ## T3-39-1.081-3 showed some corrosion and 1 <br /> pitting along the eastern base of the tank upon tanks removal <br /> Product line excavation also had evidence of leakage due to odors <br /> 2 . Observations of the sidewalls of the tank excavation, <br /> . the over excavation of the site, and the analysis of soil samples <br /> obtained from the drilling activities, show the site is underlain <br /> by horizontal laying clayey silts, to silty clays of probable <br /> flood plain deposition Bouwer and Rice Slug Tests performed on <br /> monitoring wells MW1, MW2 , MW3 , MW4, MW5 and MW6 indicate the <br /> aquifer formation to be a clayey silty sand to fine salty sand. <br /> No preferential pathways were observed or indicated. <br /> 3 . There are no nearby surface water bodies . The Stockton <br /> deep water channel is approximately 4000 feet south of the site, <br /> see Figures 1 and 2 Underground utilities consist of water <br /> supply and sewer along W. Harding and natural gas along North E1 <br /> Dorado, electrical is overhead. Due to the limited lateral <br /> extent of the near surface soil impact, underground utilities <br /> would not effect contaminant fate at this site . <br /> SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS <br /> 1. Were additional samples (other than the minimum <br /> required) taken where obviously contaminated soil was <br /> present? Yes <br /> 2 . Did sampling and analytical protocols conform to <br /> standards described in LUFT and this document? Yes, <br /> with the exception of the reporting limits . These <br /> samples were obtained, for the most part, in 1989 when <br /> reporting limits were somewhat higher. The laboratories <br /> page28 <br />