SR0080181 SSCRPT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Present and future agricultural activities on nearby properties and in surrounding areas may contribute potential environmental concerns; however,this may be said of any agricultural operations or open ground. The property has not been under conventional cultivation; therefore,no pesticides, herbicides, and/or fertilizers have been recently applied. The second source of environmental information was the referenced documents from Environmental Records Search(ERS). These documents reveal environmental information obtained directly from listed public sources. The data indicates no environmental threat to the subject property within a one mile radius. The third informational source is the Geotracker Site List from the State Water Resources Control Board for underground storage tanks (USTs), leaking underground fuel tanks (LUFTs) and other contaminated sites. The Site List reveals no contaminated sites within a one mile radius of the property. Groundwater gradient flow is generally regarded to be in a northeast direction. There are no upgradient referenced contaminated sites, and contaminated sites substantially upgradient from the property may be considered too far and extremely unlikely to impact it. However,this does not preclude contaminated groundwater from flowing under the subject property from an unknown source. §3.2 Description of all past on-site potential and/or known above and below ground sources of contamination identified on the property include: 1.) There is no record of there being an above ground or underground permitted fuel storage tank(s) (ASTs/USTs)on the property. 2.)No observation was made of natural soil depression areas over the surface of the property, which may be indicative of buried material. 3.)No soil staining by hazardous materials was observed. 4.) There are three electrical transformers located on the property that indicate no oil leakage. The predominate wind direction through the region is to the east-southeast. West-northwest, or upgradient wind shed is composed of agricultural production land including pasture land, row crops and orchards. Agrichemicals cannot be applied during windy conditions,thus ensuring that the likelihood of impact to the property from unintended pesticide drift is extremely unlikely. Although DDT was banned in 1972, its presence in San Joaquin Valley soils is an indication of its long half-life of 15.6 years. Consequently, there may be extremely small concentrations of DDT and its degradates in the property soils from farming operations that may have taken place on the property, or from the upgradient wind shed. Any minute residual pesticide concentrations are inconsequential. §3.3 Description of all current on-site potential and/or known above ground and below ground sources of contamination identified at the project site are included in Section 3.2. No sources of current aboveground contamination were observed. Page -4- Chesney Consulting