Laserfiche WebLink
IV)1 <br /> The property as supplied by city water; according to the San <br /> Joaquin County Flood Control Distract map , (P1ate Yy ) there are <br /> no private or domestic wells within 1/2 male of the site. <br /> Available records reveal that most wells are completed below 125 <br /> feet due to the lack of sufficient aquifers above that depth_ <br /> PRIOR USAGE OF UST <br /> The 10,000 gallon UST had been installed sometime prior to 1984 <br /> for the purpose of fueling Canteen Corp. delivery trucks and <br /> company vehicles. According to company personel , it had only <br /> contained unleaded gasoline. Records of fuel purchase and <br /> volumes used are not available. The pump island hao been iocateo <br /> on the southeast side of the tank , just at the edge of the <br /> existing carport roof . <br /> SUMMARY OF PRIOR WORD <br /> Can March 31 , 1912, the UST was removed by Capital Tank Services_ <br /> Soil samples were taken at the north and south ends of the tank , <br /> and one from the middle, all at depths of from 12 to 14 feet. <br /> Manor contamination was removed from the location of the pump <br /> island , but a soil sample was not taken from that area_ <br /> Sail samples taken from the site of the removed tank and the west <br /> end of the spoil stored on location were tested for BTEX, TPH-G, <br /> EDB, and total lead. Laboratory results revealed that the three <br /> (3) samples from the excavation and the one from the west end of <br /> the spoil pale were below detection limits. However , the sampIe <br /> from the east end of the spoil pile revealed significant I evel __. <br /> of Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene, and TRH-S. Table I summarizes <br /> those laboratory test results. <br /> After soil sampling was completed , the removed spoil was returned <br /> to the excavation and covered with clean fill . The site was then <br /> sealed with asphalt to allow full use of the area. <br /> Because the contaminated spoil was returned to the hole instead <br /> of being r®mediated or removed from Lhe site, the County EHD <br /> would not approve site closure. <br /> On September 29, 1992, Jim Thorpe Oil prepared a work plan to <br /> reexcavate and resample the site under the supervision of a <br /> registered professional ; refer to Exhibit B for a copy of that <br /> workplan. <br /> Prior to beginning the work , Jim Thorpe Oil personel obtained two <br /> samples of the spoil which had returned to the hole by removing <br />