SU0004910 SSCRPT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Parcels 1, 2 and 4. As referenced, there are items for solid waste disposal and as noted, are in the process of being removed. The site was carefully inspected for environmental concerns originating from discolored, disturbed/subsided soils, stressed vegetation or unusual/noxious odors. No disturbed soils were observed. As evidenced by the attached photographs, there appears to be no hazardous material spillage and there was no indication or observations of contaminated surface soils. An important concern associated with the environmental assessment of open properties is the issue of buried pesticide/hazardous materials containers, or discarded items. It was an occasional practice to dispose of containers or discarded items by this method many years ago. To detect these types of underground artifacts is difficult even with the use of ground penetrating radar or other types of non-intrusive, subsurface analyses. The land surface did not exhibit visual indicators for buried containers such as surfacing of product residue, soil mounding, or localized soil depressions. There is a large soil mound directly northeast of the existing residential structure. It was conveyed by the ,?i� Tivald's that this was a cattle livestock pond when the property was a dairy before 1959. Given the extreme compactness of the underlying soils, in particular the hardpan stratum that exists in this locale,buried materials from several decades ago may be considered unlikely. It is usually after a contaminant plume has impacted a domestic well that buried pesticide containers are discovered. If buried items are discovered during the on-going clean-up process of proposed Parcel 3, or underground utility placements on the new parcels, Chesney Consulting and/or the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department must be contacted immediately. Electrical transformers were found on power poles around the property. One of the adjacent 3) transformers near the property appears to be the original transformer. Therefore, it may contain polychloride biphenyl (PCB) laden oil. If this transformer were to leak or explode, it would be the responsibility of the transformer owner(P.G. &E.) to mitigate any environmental contamination. From previous nitrate loading and soil suitability studies in this locale, it is known that there are typically lower concentrations of nitrate in the underlying aquifers in comparison to areas of shallower groundwater that are under agricultural production. Low nitrate concentrations in this area may be attributable to the relatively deep groundwater, no agricultural fertilizer inputs and a very low septic system density. Due to these environmental mitigation factors of a deep �•�) groundwater and heavy clay/hardpan soils, it is my opinion that the cattle which were run on the property should have an extremely low nitrate impact potential to the underlying groundwater. PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL RECORD/DATA SOURCES Static groundwater is found approximately 122 feet under the property as illustrated on the attached 1999 Lines of Equal Depth to Groundwater map. From the 1999 Lines of Equal Elevation of Groundwater, the groundwater directional flow appears to be toward the east- southeast, although the gradient is considerably flat. A groundwater depth of 122 feet can be considered a deep groundwater elevation which typically is not seriously impacted from point source hazardous materials releases, agrichemicals such as pesticides/herbicides, or nitrates from fertilizers. The degree of impact from agrichemicals is particularly mitigated when there are intervening layers of clay or hardpan soil down to the static water table depth. As referenced, itis known that a hardpan and clay strata exist in this locale. Page -3- Chesney Consulting