Laserfiche WebLink
• •hue 11 Environmental Site Assessment <br />Heritage Square <br />Page 9 <br />typical soils in the vicinity of the site impede contaminant mobility and can often result in a highly <br />localized zone of impacted soil, such as appears to be present in association with TKI. <br />The contaminant plume in the vicinity of TK2 appears to be more mobile than that near TKI as the <br />bottom of TK2 is at approximately four feet bgs and the laboratory analytical results indicate detectable <br />concentrations of hydrocarbon constituents at depths of 1 1 feet bgs and 15.5 feet bgs. No hydrocarbon <br />constituents were detected in the samplecollected from 20 feet bgs near TK2, indicating that <br />contamination is limited to shallower depths. <br />No hydrocarbon constituents were detected in the samples collected from borings C-1 through C-4, <br />indicating that no contamination in association with the underground piping beneath the Heritage Square <br />building is present. <br />The detected concentrations of hydrocarbon constituents in the groundwater sample collected from boring <br />B-5 near TK2 were below values requiring regulatory action. In addition, though the groundwater sample <br />collected from boring B-3 near TKI had detectable concentrations of TPH-MO, Condor is not aware of <br />any established regulatory guidelines for heavy oil contamination of groundwater. Furthermore, it is <br />Condor's opinion that the laboratory analytical results for the groundwater samples collected from <br />borings B-3 and B-5 represent cross -contamination of the samples during advancement of the borings for <br />the following reasons: <br />• The depth to groundwater at the site is greater than 30 feet bgs. <br />• The laboratory analytical results indicate that no soil samples collected at the site from deeper <br />than 15.5 feet bgs were impacted by hydrocarbon contamination. <br />• The local soil types at the site are tight clays, restricting the movement of contaminants <br />through the subsurface. <br />• The soil contamination is characterized by heavy hydrocarbon constituents and direct push <br />boring activities have the potential to smear such contaminants during boring advancement. <br />Even if the heavy hydrocarbon constituent groundwater contamination is not the result of cross - <br />contamination, it is reasonable to expect the contaminants to be immobile in water and to adhere to the <br />soil rather than migrate with groundwater. <br />The total lead concentrations detected in the soil samples collected from borings C-1 through C-4 and for <br />the soil samples collected at 15.5 feet bgs in borings B-3 and B-5 are within background levels for the site <br />location and are below the 400 mg/kg PRG value for residential soils. Additionally, the detected lead <br />concentrations were compared to typical lead concentrations of California soils, as identified in the <br />Kearney Foundation Special Report "Background Concentrations of Trace and Major Elements in <br />California Soils" (Bradford, et al., 1996). The report details the results of soil sampling performed on 50 <br />benchmark California soils to determine typical background concentrations of 46 elements and found a <br />lead concentration range from 12.4 mg/kg to 97.1 mg/kg. The lead concentrations detected at the site fall <br />below and within this range of typical California soil background lead concentrations.Tbe detected CAM <br />17 metals concentrations in the soil samples collected at 15.5 feet bgs in borings B-3 and B-5 were all <br />below the PRG values for residential soils, except arsenic. Arsenic was detected in these samples above <br />the PRG cancer endpoint value, but below the PRG noncancer endpoint value. Arsenic is commonly <br />detected in soil samples collected from locations in the San Joaquin Valley at concentrations in this range. <br />IW %46� <br />CONDOR <br />