SU0009533 SSCRPT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

§ 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS § 5.1 Evaluations of each point source potential contamination described(i.e., no LUFT and UST sites within 1000 ft of the property, and the on-site,and surrounding septic tanks)and non-point sources (i.e.,on-site and surrounding agrichemical application with the possibility of non-target drift, and nitrate in the underlying groundwater)pose a very low-to-insignificant risk to the subject property and human health. Septic system density in this locale can be considered very sparse. Consequently,the degree of nitrate-nitrogen impact from this source can be considered extremely small. A May 10,2013 deadline is rapidly poroaching for farms and ranches that store oil and/or chemicals to have an oil spill prevention plan referred to as a Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. It is highly recommended that Mr. Faria contact the California Farm Bureau Federation who can direct him in compliance with these upcoming requirements. Since on-site fuel storage is below 10,000 gallons, a professional civil engineer is not required to certify the plan; Mr. Faria can self-certify. It is impossible that any publicly referenced LUFT site, or published point sources of contamination could affect groundwater under the subject property. There are no observable remnants of underground tank appurtenances on, or immediately surrounding the property. Therefore, it may be considered highly unlikely that any tanks in this locale may affect the property because of the (5• ), distances involved. It is noted in the Environmental Questionnaire that there was apparently never an underground fuel storage tank on the property for as long as the Faria's have owned the property. The ASTM E-1527-00 Document referenced on Page 2 refers to de minimus environmental conditions. De minimus conditions generally do not present a material risk to public health or to the environment and generally would not include an enforcement action if observed by the appropriate governmental agencies. Household hazardous materials may be considered de minimus concerns if there has been no spillage or dumping. Typical household "hazardous materials" include gasoline, paint thinners, new and used motor oil, antifreeze,etc. Storage, spillage and/or dumping of typical household hazardous substances were not observed. The aforementioned potential of asbestos and lead paint within the residential structure is a possibility. Section 9-905.12 of San Joaquin County Development Title states"Corrective Action: If the report indicates there are surface and subsurface contamination, corrective action shall be recommended in the report and concurred with by Environmental Health prior to the issuance of the building permit." Therefore, it is our professional opinion that no environmental corrective action is required on the /5 \ subject property at this point in time,except for potential compliance issues under the Dairy General l J Order. This would be the responsibility of Innovative Ag Services, as consultant to Mr. Faria. The majority of the subject property will continue to be productive farmland,and is surrounded by properties that engage in production agriculture. Consequences of this surrounding land use include: Noise, dust, odors, insects, machinery, spray equipment, crop dusting aircraft,trucks,exhaust and other environmental effects that may be offensive to some people. It is our opinion that bottled water should always be used for drinking and cooking purposes in agricultural production regions. § 5.2 The Appendices, found in Section 7 incorporate all of the applicable information referenced in this report. Page -7-