Laserfiche WebLink
TABLt 1 - CHECKLIST OF REQUIRED DATA <br /> FOR NO FURTHER ACTION REQUESTS AT UNDERGROUND TANK SITES <br /> Site Name and Location: Unocal#0123, 1034 Central Avenue, Tracy, San Joaquin County <br /> 0 1. Distance to production wells for municipal, domestic, agriculture, Eight water supply wells were identified within 2,000 <br /> industry and other uses within 2000 feet of the site; feet of the site. A municipal well is 1,400 feet north of <br /> the site and screened from 490 to 980 feet. <br /> 0 Y <br /> 2. Site maps, to scale, of area impacted showing locations of former and existing tank systems, Six USTs were removed, and <br /> excavation contours and sample locations, boring and monitoring well elevation contours, one UST was closed in <br /> gradients, and nearby surface waters, buildings,streets, and subsurface utilities; place. Site maps provided. <br /> 0 3. Figures depicting lithology(cross section), treatment system diagrams; Boring logs and cross-sections show clay and <br /> silty sand to 26 feet. <br /> 4. Stockpiled soil disposed off-site(quantity); AAproximately 75 cubic yards of contaminated loll was disposed at <br /> Forward Landfill. <br /> 5. Monitoring wells remaining on-site, fate; Eight monitoring welll currently exist on-site. The wells will be properly <br /> Ell destroyed following site closure. <br /> 0->�6.Tabulated results-of all groundwater-elevations-and depths-to water, Groundwater levels varied from 8_to,12 feet below <br /> ground surface, and flow is to the northeast. <br /> 7.Tabulated results of a!!sampling and analyses: <br /> Maximum groundwater monitoring results for December 2000 in Ng11 <br /> Py <br /> show TPHg at i49, TPHd of 370, benzene at 3.68, and ethyl benzene at <br /> ©Detection limits forconfrrmation sampling 0`,969. Toluene,xylenes, MtBE, and other oxygenates were non-detect <br /> El Lead analyses at appropriate detection limits. Maximum lead in soil is 16 mg/kg. <br /> t <br /> 8. Concentration contours of contaminants found and(hose remaining in soil The lateral and vertical extent of soil and <br /> and groundwater, and both on-site and off-site: groundwater contamination has been <br /> © Lateral and Y❑ Vertical extent of soil contamination defined. <br /> Lateral and Vertical extent ofgroundwater contamfnation <br /> 9. Zone of influence calculated and assumptions used for subsurface A remediation system was not required at <br /> remediation system and the zone of capture attained for the soil and I this site. <br /> groundwater remediation system; <br /> FE 10.Reports/information El Unauthorized Release Form 0(Z'Qtr 1995 to 4' Qtr 2000) <br /> e <br /> Boring logs N� PAR FRP Y❑ Other(Closure Request, 4/01) <br /> Y� 11.Best Available Technology(BAT)used or an explanation for not using BAT, Remove USTs, natural attenuation of <br /> contaminants. <br /> 12.Reasons why background was/1'sContamination remains in shallow soil and groundwater both on-site and north <br /> of the site into 11 Stre <br /> unattainable using BAT; et. Further remediation is not cost effective. The <br /> i .._ <br /> groundwater contamination is limited in extent;and remaining concentrations-,­— <br /> do not pr`,esent at significant threat to water quality. <br /> 0 13.Mass balance calculation of substance The consultant estimates the initial mass was approximately 500 pounds of <br /> treated versus that remaining, TPHg. About 75 cubiclyards of contaminated soil was removed with the USTs. <br /> Confirmation borings were not required. <br /> 14.Assumptions, parameters, calculations and model used in risk <br /> Based on the limited extent of groundwater <br /> assessments, and fate and transport modeling; contamination,a risk assessment was not required. <br /> 15. Rationale why conditions remaining at site will no(adversely Remaining contamination is limited in extent. <br /> impact wafer quality, health, or other beneficial uses;and Contamination will naturally degrade. <br /> ByComments: Four 500 to 6,000-gallon waste oil to gasoline USTs were removed from the site prior to 1865. Two 550-gallon <br /> gasoline USTs were removed in 11/96, and one 500 to 1,000-gallon UST was closed in place in 12196. Soil contamination was <br /> identified during the UST removals, soil borings and monitoring wells were installed, and groundwater monitoring has been <br /> : . <br /> conducted from 6/95 to 12100. MtBE was identified in a water sample from monitoring well U-1 at a maximum of 5.6 ug/!by EPA <br /> Date: Method 8260B. All other fuel oxygenates are non-detect at appropriate detection limits. PCE and TCE were identified in <br /> upgradient and downgradient monitoring wells at maximum concentrations of 17.8 pg4 and 8.42 pg4, respectively. The source of <br /> '�II�� solvent contamination is unknown;however,the remaining concentrations do not present a significant threat to water quality. The <br /> /' r site is covered with asphalt, which should limit further leaching of contaminants into groundwater. Based on the investigation <br /> completed to date, Board staff concur with San Joaquin County's closure recommendation. <br /> F <br />