Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> Stockton East Water District and the Lagomarsino Brothers facility. Underground storage tanks <br /> located at these facilities have been documented and there have been no reported leaks at these <br /> facilities. The third facility is the Econo #05748 service station. This station did have USTs <br /> which leaked and impacted the underlying aquifer. But as referenced under the Remediation <br /> Status,this case has been closed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. <br /> The fourth facility is the Marley Cooling tower Company. This facility has significant <br /> groundwater contamination. Records were obtained from the San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department which illustrate the contamination plume and groundwater <br /> monitoring and remediation. The attached "Well Location Map" indicates the subject properties <br /> with a starer. The groundwater gradient, and therefore the contaminant plume are towards the <br /> southwest. It appears the subject properties have not been impacted from the contaminant plume <br /> based upon the location of the monitoring/remediation wells. If it is found in the future that there <br /> is contamination under the subject properties from the Marley Cooling Tower Company,they <br /> would be legally obligated to remediate the groundwater. <br /> INFORMATION FROM SITE RECONNAISSANCE <br /> The subject property appears to contains no underground storage tanks(USTs). Evidence for <br /> USTs would include dispensing hoses and/or pumps, risers, or vent pipes. There are no above <br /> ground tanks (ASTs). <br /> The subject property was surveyed for the following which may be evidence for surface and/or <br /> subsurface contamination: There are no transformers on-site; therefore,there is no concern from <br /> polychloride biphenyl (PCB) contamination. Nor was there any evidence of solid waste disposal, <br /> other than discarded tires on Parcel 2 of Site#2. Both sites were inspected for environmental <br /> concerns originating from discolored, disturbed or subsided soils, stressed vegetation(other than <br /> what would be considered normal), and unusual or noxious odors. None were observed. <br /> An important concern associated with the environmental assessment of properties is the issue of <br /> buried pesticide or other types of containers. It was an occasional practice to dispose of <br /> containers by this method many years ago. Detection of these types of underground artifacts is <br /> difficult-to-impossible even with the use of ground penetrating radar or other types of non- <br /> intrusive, subsurface analyses. The land surface did not exhibit visual indicators for buried <br /> containers such as surfacing of product residue, soil mounding or soil depressions. <br /> The static groundwater is found approximately 70 feet under the property. This is considered a <br /> comparatively deep elevation in relation to other parts of the County. Groundwater at this depth <br /> is not easily impacted from pesticides or nitrogen in the form of nitrates. The on-site soils <br /> consist of a medium to high clay content soil which can attenuate agrichemical residue in <br /> comparison to a sandy soil. <br /> 2 <br /> Of Quality Coontrol Inspection <br />