SU0004681 SSCRPT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Although the Raymond Greer site is upgradient to the subject property with respect to groundwater flow, it is extremely unlikely this site can impact the subject property with groundwater contamination since it is approximately 0.75 miles to the southeast of the subject property. Groundwater Lines of Equal Depth and Equal Elevation Maps found in Appendix F illustrate groundwater flow to be northwest. The second source of information used was the Geotracker System maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board. This System illustrates all underground fuel storage tanks and leaking underground storage tanks. The map found in Appendix D illustrates the Monitoring Wells at the aforementioned Raymond Greer site. The Site to the south is Da Silva Dairy, which also has contamination. The third informational source is the Environmental Questionnaire found in Appendix C. This documents environmental information directly from the people most knowledgeable about site, namely Mr. Bavaro, who was also interviewed for completion of this Report. The fourth informational source for agricultural pesticide documentation and agrichemical environmental fate data was obtained from the San Joaquin County Ag Commissioner's Office and the University of California at Davis and Oregon State University Extoxnet System. § 3.2 Description of all past on-site potential and/or known above and below ground sources of contamination identified at the project site include the past cropping history of the property. As referenced, grapes were planted at the east end of the subject property and on the adjacent Parcels 1 and 2. This vineyard was in existence in the 1970s when there is a possibility that dibromochloropropane (DBCP)may have been applied. Consequently, all domestic wells installed on the subject Parcels should be tested for DBCP before they are completed. No agrichemicals have been mixed in the past, or are currently mixed on the property, as noted on the Environmental Questionnaire. Since there is no well on the property, agrichemicals could not have been mixed. A"Request To Access Files" (See Appendix E) was submitted to the S.J.C. Ag Commissioner's Office on August 3, 2005. Verbal communication with Ms. Hazel Galego on August 18, 2005 indicates that over the review time period between August 3 and August 18,Use Report and Permits for the subject property have not been found that are applicable to the property. If Reports or Permits are subsequently found for restricted agrichemicals that have been applied to the property, an addendum to this SSCR will be submitted to EHD. There has never been an above ground or underground fuel storage tank on the property for the len ime the revious owner, Ms._Dicksie Woodward owned the roe She owned the property for years. No septic tanks or leachfields are on the property at this time. Ultimately, there will be five septic tanks and leachfields (and possibly 10 with second unit dwellings) on the entire property acreage of 25 acres, which can be considered a very low density with respect to potential nitrate impact. Pa a-4- Chesney Consulting