Laserfiche WebLink
removed. It would also be helpful to indicate this area on an historical aerial photograph so that <br /> the lateral extent of excavation can be compared to the aerial photograph. <br /> Removal of the waste from the site to a Class 11 landfill was conducted in December 2015. <br /> Approximately 3,567 tons of waste glass, minor garbage and cover soils were disposed. The <br /> waste glass/metal was loaded into end dump trucks for transport to Forward Landfill under special <br /> waste manifest. Comments: If wastes were excavated in September 2015, did they sit at the site <br /> until they were transported off site for disposal several months later in December 2015? How were <br /> the waste stockpiles managed? Were they managed in accordance with Best Management <br /> Practices? (e.g., were the stockpiled materials covered? runoff prevented, etc.). The types of <br /> wastes are described as waste glass/metal and are inconsistent with other descriptions. Why did <br /> cover soils also go to a Class II landfill? <br /> The excavation is finalized, it produced a volume of over 2,200 cubic yards of waste. The waste <br /> has been removed and therefore removes the requirement to continue to excavate waste. <br /> Comments:Adequate documentation to verify wastes were removed such as confirmation sample <br /> locations and analytical testing, daily field reports, compilation of photographs and other <br /> documentation was not provided; therefore, the adequacy of waste removal is not known. <br /> r <br /> The email stated that AGE had not provided details on the proposed development and that the <br /> very little detail provided is inadequate. It was stated that the waste went on to the neighboring <br /> property and that would be a concern for construction at or near that area. It was stated that there <br /> could be other waste material that was not found during the limited investigation. Any other waste <br /> pits or areas that may be found during construction would need to have a contingency. CCR <br /> Title 27 requirements related to post closure land use were provided in the email. <br /> i tpw,a C riat +�• •ate _�,r .�- ^� —_ — <br /> Raney Geotechnical Inc. prepared a Foundation Investigation report for Buzz Oates Development <br /> LP. The report summarized their understandings of the project and provided geotechnical <br /> information related to the planned construction of the warehouse. The report provided data <br /> pertinent to earthwork construction, foundation design, floor support, and pavement design. A <br /> significant amount of geotechnical information and recommendations were provided in addition to <br /> the abbreviated information summarized below. However, for purposes of this limited historical <br /> study, the information included in this summary focused on the "glass waste disposal area", <br /> general information about the site and surrounding properties, and planned construction. The <br /> following information was provided in the report: <br /> • The field exploration program included drilling ten test borings to depths of ten to 20 feet bgs, and <br /> one boring to a depth of 50 feet. Undisturbed soil samples were obtained from the borings for <br /> classification and laboratory testing. Disturbed samples of the near surface soils also were <br /> obtained from proposed pavement areas. <br /> Ninyo&Moore 1 500 E.Louise Avenue,Lathrop,San Joaquin County,California 1 104690095 1 August 11,2017 53 <br />