SU0004674 SSCRPT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

INFORMATION FROM SITE RECONNAISSANCE AND INTERVIEWS The following information was obtained visually or through an interview with Ms. Prouty: The subject property contains no underground or above ground storage tanks (USTs/ASTs) and never has. This is documented by the fact that Ms. Prouty has lived on the property almost her entire lifetime. Her parents and grandparents have farmed the subject parcel since 1918, when irrigation water conveyed by canal and pipeline arrived. Consequently, she has an excellent history of property. In 1924, her family started a dairy on the property and operated this dairy from 1924 through 1951. In 1938, her father built the milk barn which is now used for her newspaper business. Even back then, her father was environmentally conscious. Wash water from the milk barn flowed into a large septic tank at the east end of the bam, with the digested effluent distributed to the farmland on the south three-fourths of the property. I The septic system for the milk barn no longer exists. An on-site septic system serves the house. The property has no irrigation wells and one domestic well. There is a slight possibility of minute volumes of agrichemical drift originating from almond production land located to the south, if agrichemicals are used on this acreage. The subject property can be considered in the predominant upgradient windshed to this almond acreage. A thick, tall thistle brush surrounds the open pasture land and makes a natural fence to keep livestock in the pasture and may act as a barrier against potential agrichemical drift. Livestock on this pasture consists of cattle and horses. The San Joaquin County Mosquito Abatement District sprays for mosquitos in the open pasture land. The entire subject property was walked and surveyed for evidence which may be indicative of surface and/or subsurface contamination: No containers were noted on-site, other than those discussed below. No evidence of solid waste disposal was noted, other than brush, wood and metal. The site was carefully inspected for environmental concerns originating from discolored, disturbed/subsided soils, stressed vegetation or unusual/noxious odors. None of these environmental indicators were present. As evidenced by the attached photographs, one drum and two five gallon containers were noted on- site. The two five-gallon buckets and drum were empty. The drum had been used by Ms. Prouty many years ago when she was a barrel racer. No hazardous materials are stored on-site and there was no indication or observations of spills or other items associated with hazardous materials. Her newspaper publication is printed with a laser color printer. Therefore, no hazardous materials such as ink,picture developing chemicals or solvents are on the property or in the old milk barn building. An important concern associated with the environmental assessment of open properties is the issue of buried pesticide 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 s/ 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 soil depressions. Given the Page-2- Ches Consulting