Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Tammy Hodge CAMBRIA <br /> November 1, 1996 <br /> RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> The primary objective of Cambria's review was to assess whether the site can be considered a low-risk ground <br /> water site'. A low-risk ground water site has the following general characteristics: <br /> • The leak has stopped and the hydrocarbon source has been removed; <br /> • The site is adequately characterized; <br /> • Ground water is less than 50 ft deep; <br /> • The hydrocarbon plume is stable or decreasing; <br /> • No water wells or other sensitive receptors are likely to be impacted; <br /> • No preferential pathways exist at the site; <br /> • The site presents no significant risk to human health; <br /> • The site presents no significant risk to the environment. <br /> Site specific characteristics relevant to each of the RWQCB characteristics are discussed below. <br /> The Leak Has Stopped and the Hydrocarbon Source Removed: The tanks and piping have been removed, <br /> no liquid-phase hydrocarbons have ever been detected at the site and the hydrocarbon concentrations detected <br /> in soil do not suggest the presence of liquid-phase hydrocarbons in soil. In addition, the clayey site soils to 10 <br /> ft depth prevent leaching of hydrocarbons from the vadose zone. Therefore, there does not appear to be <br /> hydrocarbon source remaining in soil that could result in increasing hydrocarbon concentrations in ground <br /> water. This conclusion is supported by the decreasing hydrocarbon concentrations in ground water which <br /> indicate that no significant source is present. <br /> Site Characterization: The extent of hydrocarbons in soil and ground water has been adequately defined by <br /> the eight soil borings (five of these wereconverted to monitoring wells) and five monitoring wells. As <br /> discussed earlier,hydrocarbons in soil are confined to a small area at about 10 ft depth adjacent to the eastern <br /> wall of the former gasoline tank pit. <br /> 1 California Regional water Quality Control Board-Central Valley Region:Revised Draft Recommendation for tow Risk <br /> Site Classification,6 pages,July 1996. <br />