My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
26 (STATE ROUTE 26)
>
19107
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0538141
>
COMPLIANCE INFO
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/20/2024 8:49:44 AM
Creation date
6/15/2020 3:13:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
RECORD_ID
PR0538141
PE
2950
FACILITY_ID
FA0022029
FACILITY_NAME
CAL TRANS LINDEN PROJECT
STREET_NUMBER
19107
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
STATE ROUTE 26
City
LINDEN
Zip
95236
APN
09127016
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
19107 E HWY 26
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
TSok
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Geophysical UST Investigation AGS Project 13-084-ICA <br /> Linden,California <br /> variations (in millivolts) across the site (Figure 3). As part of the analysis, AGS looked for high- <br /> amplitude responses not readily attributable to known site features. Such responses are considered <br /> "anomalies"and are attributed to subsurface source bodies,which may include USTs, buried utilities, <br /> reinforced concrete foundations, and miscellaneous metallic debris. On the color contour maps, <br /> anomalies appear as "hot" (orange, red, and pink) colors representing areas with elevated EM61 <br /> measurements indicative of metallic objects. <br /> Because the EM61 was designed to produce a positive signal peak at the center of the metallic source <br /> body, it tends to produce anomalies with a shape and extent that approximates the footprint of the metal <br /> source object. Accordingly,AGS looked for rectangular anomalies with a footprint corresponding to the <br /> dimensions of the reported UST; however, it is worth noting that anomaly footprints are usually larger <br /> than that of the anomaly source body, and the footprint may also be distorted by nearby surface metal <br /> objects,underground utilities,and UST appurtenances. Anomaly amplitudes associated with USTs and <br /> similarly-sized metallic substructures depend on burial depth,but they are typically 200 millivolts(mV) <br /> or greater. <br /> AGS incorporated the site map into the EM61 contour map so that responses associated with surface <br /> metal objects and underground utilities could be identified and disregarded from consideration as a <br /> possible UST indication. As a further aid to the analysis, data profiles for each survey transect were <br /> prepared and inspected. The profiles are especially useful for assessing anomaly amplitudes and for <br /> identifying bad data caused by,say,a loose connection within the EM system or other type of equipment <br /> malfunction. <br /> 7.0 LIMITATIONS of GEOPHYSICAL LOCATING METHODS <br /> In general,a geophysical method's limitations for detecting a particular target are related to the target's <br /> size, burial depth, the amount of contrast in material properties between the target and surrounding <br /> material, and finally, the amount of interference from surrounding site features. For a target to be <br /> detected it must have sufficient size to reflect or otherwise disturb some the incoming energy used for <br /> detection. It also must have enough contrast with the surrounding material to reflect or otherwise disturb <br /> enough of the incoming energy so as to be detected. And, finally, it can't be buried so deeply that the <br /> reflected/disturbed energy is so dissipated that it is too weak to be detected when it returns to the surface. <br /> Weak energy returns during geophysical investigations are further exacerbated by ambient noise like that <br /> produced by natural and cultural features,such as utilities,fences,parked vehicles,vegetative cover,and <br /> debris. <br /> As stated above and shown on Figures 2 and 3, the Linden site contained buried utilities, and was <br /> bounded to the north by a building. These features produced electromagnetic interference that could <br /> have responses from buried objects,including a small UST. In addition soil conditions limited the GPR <br /> signal penetration to approximately 3 feet bgs;accordingly,objects buried deeper than 3 feet would not <br /> detected with GPR. <br /> p 5 ADVANCED GEOLOGICAL SERVICES <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.