《SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTCalifornia Department ….doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTCalifornia Department ….doc（28页珍藏版）》请在三一办公上搜索。
1、Site Investigation ReportRoute 1 - Devils Slide Tunnel ProjectPacifica - San Mateo County PREPARED FOR:CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, HAZARDOUS WASTE BRANCH 111 W. GRAND AVE OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 1326 NORTH
2、MARKET BOULEVARD SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT 43A0078 TASK ORDER NO. 04-112371-CYSITE INVESTIGATION REPORTAERIALLY DEPOSITED LEAD INVESTIGATIONROUTE 1 AT DEVILS SLIDEPACIFICA, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA二月 17, 2023Prepared for:California Department of TransportationNorth Region Hazardous Waste O
3、fficeDistrict 4111 Grand Avenue, 14th FloorOakland, California 94623Prepared by:Shaw Environmental, Inc.1326 North Market BoulevardSacramento, California 95834-1912Task Order No.: 04-276701-CNCaltrans Contract No.: 43A0078Project No.: 845013.0101SITE INVESTIGATION REPORTAERIALLY DEPOSITED LEAD INVES
4、TIGATIONROUTE 1 AT DEVILS SLIDEPACIFICA, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA二月 17, 2023Prepared for:California Department of TransportationNorth Region Hazardous Waste OfficeDistrict 4111 Grand Avenue, 14th FloorOakland, California 94623Prepared by:Shaw Environmental1326 North Market BoulevardSacramento, C
5、alifornia 95834-1912Task Order No.: 04-112371-CYCaltrans Contract No.: 43A0078Project No.: 845013.0101_Benjamin ChevlenMartha Adams, P.E.Staff GeologistProject ManagerReport LimitationsThis report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted practices using standards of care and diligence
6、 normally practiced by recognized consulting firms performing services of a similar nature. This report presents our professional judgment based upon data and findings identified in this report and the interpretation of such data based on our experience and background, and no warranty, either expres
7、sed or implied, is made. The conclusions presented are based on the current regulatory climate and may require revision if future regulatory changes occur.The findings identified in this report are predicated on the results of the limited sampling and laboratory testing performed. This report does n
8、ot address impacts related to sources other than those specified herein.The contents of this report reflect the views of Shaw Environmental, Inc., who is responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the
9、 State of California or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.SHAW ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.Martha Adams, P.E. Project ManagerCalifornia Department Of Transportationoffice of environmental engineering - hazardous waste BranchReviewed b
10、y:_Naveen AachiTask Order ManagerRecommended by:_Celia McCuaig, P.E.Senior Environmental EngineerApproved by:_Allen Baradar, P.E., READistrict Office ChiefProject TeamContactAffiliationResponsibilityCelia McCuaig, P.E.(510) 286-5659Department District 4Office of Environmental Engineering, Hazardous
11、Waste Branch111 Grand Avenue, 14th FloorOakland, California 94623Contract ManagerNaveen Aachi(510) 286-4914Task Order ManagerMartha Adams, P.E.(916) 565-4183Shaw Environmental, Inc.1326 North Market Blvd Sacramento, California 95834Project ManagerBenjamin Chevlen(916) 565-4353Site SupervisorTable of
12、 ContentsList of TablesvList of FiguresvList of AppendicesvReport LimitationsiiiProject TeamivExecutive Summary11.0Introduction1-11.1Project Description1-11.2Project Objective1-12.0Scope of Work2-12.1Planning and Permitting2-13.0Field Investigation3-13.1Laboratory Analyses3-24.0Site Investigation Re
13、sults4-14.1Lead Investigation Results4-15.0Data Evaluation5-15.1Lead Concentrations and Distribution5-15.2Lead Data Statistical Analysis5-25.2.1Summary5-46.0Conclusions and Recommendations6-17.0References7-1List of TablesTable 1 Lead Analytical Data and GPS LocationsList of FiguresFigure 1 Site Loca
14、tion Map Figure 2 Boring Location Map List of AppendicesAppendix A Drilling and Sampling ProceduresAppendix B Laboratory Analytical Reports and Chain-of-Custody FormsAppendix C Lead Statistical Analysis SpreadsheetsExecutive SummaryThis report presents the results of the soil investigation that was
15、conducted by Shaw Environmental, Inc. along State Route (SR) 1 in San Mateo County, California (Figure 1). The investigation as described in this report was conducted along the northbound and southbound shoulders of SR1 between post mile (PM) 36.6 and 40.9 in San Mateo County, California (Figure 2).
16、This investigation was conducted at the request and authorization of Mr.Naveen Aachi of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and in general accordance with Caltrans Contract 43A0078, Task Order Number 04-112371-CY.The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the presence and co
17、ncentration of aerially deposited lead in soil prior to improvement activities proposed for SR 1. The objective was to screen soil that will be excavated from the site during the proposed construction activities.The site investigation included the advancement of 9 shallow soil borings along the nort
18、hbound shoulder and 4 shallow soil borings along the southbound shoulder area of SR-1 using direct-push sampling equipment. Three soil samples per boring location were collected for analysis from depths of 0.0 to 0.30 meters (0.0 to 1.0 feet), 0.46 to 0.76 meters (1.5 to 2.5 feet), and 0.91 to 1.22
19、meters (3.0 to 4.0 feet) below ground surface, respectively. A total of 34 soil samples were collected and submitted for analysis. Lead was reported in soil samples collected from the site. Total lead concentrations ranged from less than 1.0 to 448 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in soil samples ana
20、lyzed. The source for the lead is not known, however, it is thought to be related to accumulation of dust and debris containing lead from leaded gasoline emissions.Lead concentrations were compared to Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) of 1,000mg/kg, and SolubleThreshold Limit Concentration
21、(STLC) of 5 milligrams per liter (mg/l) values to evaluate whether the soil would be considered a California hazardous waste, should it become a waste. No soil samples analyzed during this investigation exceeded the TTLC value of 1,000 mg/kg for total lead. Only one soil sample, collected in surface
22、 soil in boring 1, was reported to contain total lead in excess of 350 mg/kg, a level requiring waste disposal in a Class I facility.A total of two soil samples were reported to contain soluble lead at concentrations in excess of the STLC of 5 mg/l by Waste Extraction Test (WET) analysis. Soil sampl
23、es reported to contain soluble lead exceeding the STLC would be considered a California hazardous waste, should the soil become a waste.Soil at specific sample points may be classified as a California hazardous waste, however, the data from all intervals were combined into one data set for analysis
24、as Caltrans construction plans typically call for excavation of soil to 0.6 meters (2 feet) for road base preparation. A statistical analysis for the total lead data was conducted on the entire data set. The results of the soil investigation are summarized below.AreaSoil Interval(m)Total Lead Mean(m
25、g/kg)Total Lead 90% UCL(mg/kg)Predicted WET Lead Concentration(mg/l)SR 10.0 to 1.2232.5342.432.27The mean concentration and 90% Upper Confidence Level values for total lead data were less than 350 mg/kg. This suggests that the soil, if treated as a whole and sampled on a composite basis from stockpi
26、les generated during construction activities, may not require Class I disposal. The excavated soil would likely not require soluble lead analysis by the WET, as the mean was less than 50 mg/kg. Based on the statistical analysis conducted, the waste soil, if treated as a whole and sampled on a compos
27、ite basis from stockpiles generated during construction activities, would not be considered a California hazardous waste. Special handling and disposal procedures may not be required, except as needed to protect worker health and safety. 1.0 IntroductionThis report has been prepared by Shaw Environm
28、ental Inc. (Shaw) to present the results of the soil investigation that was conducted along State Route (SR) 1 in San Mateo County, California (Figure 1). The investigation as described in this report was conducted along the northbound and southbound shoulder areas of SR 1 south of Pacifica between
29、PM 36.6 and 40.9 in San Mateo County, California.This investigation was conducted at the request and authorization of Mr.Naveen Aachi of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and in general accordance with Caltrans Contract 43A0078, Task Order Number 04-112371-CY.1.1 Project Descrip
30、tionCaltrans proposes to construct a double bore tunnel and bridge separating the two directions of traffic to bypass the geologically unstable area of Route 1 at Devils Slide in San Mateo County. All work for this site investigation was performed within Caltrans right-of-way.Shaw is not aware of an
31、y previous site investigative work in the project area.1.2 Project ObjectiveThe objective of this investigation was to determine the presence or absence of hazardous concentrations of aerially deposited lead (ADL) in shallow soil within the existing right-of-way of SR 1 in San Mateo County. The purp
32、ose of this site investigation was to screen soil that will be excavated from the site during the proposed construction activities.The results from the ADL investigation will be used to assess worker health and safety issues, soil handling and disposal procedures, and determine the applicability of
33、the Department of Toxics Substance Control (DTSC) variance for re-use of lead contaminated soil. 2.0 Scope of WorkThe scope of work for the investigation was presented in Shaws workplan dated June 11, 2003, which was approved for implementation by Caltrans. The following scope of work was conducted:
34、1. Planning2. Field Investigation3. Laboratory Analyses4. Site Investigation Report Preparation2.1 PlanningPlanning included a pre-work site visit and preparation of a work plan and health and safety plan.Mrs. Martha Adams and Mr. Benjamin Chevlen of Shaw and Mr. Naveen Aachi and Mr. Abdullah Akram
35、of Caltrans conducted a pre-work site meeting on June 9, 2003. Items discussed and reviewed during the meeting included the scope of work, the site visit checklist, and the project schedule. Mrs. Martha Adams and Mr. Benjamin Chevlen of Shaw performed a field reconnaissance of the project area and m
36、arked the boring locations for Underground Service Alert (USA). USA was notified of the subsurface investigation at least 48 hours prior to initiation of the investigation.A site-specific workplan (Shaw, 2003a) was prepared presenting the scope of work and the procedures implemented during the inves
37、tigation. The workplan also provided information regarding laboratory analyses, investigation-derived waste, and report preparation.A site-specific health and safety plan (Shaw, 2003b) was prepared in general accordance with 29CFR 1910.120. The health and safety plan included safety procedures for w
38、ork performed at the site, chemical hazard information, site safety officers, and preferred medical emergency locations (Shaw, 2003b). 3.0 Field InvestigationThe field investigation was conducted on June 13, 2003. The site investigation included the advancement of 9 shallow soil borings along the no
39、rthbound shoulder and 4 shallow soil borings along the southbound shoulder area of SR 1 (Figure 2) to provide data for the systematic evaluation of subsurface soil conditions prior to the implementation of the proposed construction activities. The soil boring locations were selected according to Cal
40、trans Task Order No.04-112371-CY. Work was conducted between the hours of 9:00A.M. and 3:00 P.M., in the unpaved portion of the shoulder, where the shoulder was wide enough to allow for safe stopping of the sampling vehicle. Where possible, the borings were located approximately 0.45 meters (1.5 fee
41、t) from the edge of pavement. All work was conducted within Caltrans right-of-way. Traffic control utilizing traffic cones for shoulder closure was implemented during the field investigation. Thirteen soil borings were advanced using direct-push drill methods (Geoprobe). The direct push soil borings
42、 were advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 1.22 meters (4.0 feet) below ground surface (BGS). Three soil samples per shallow direct push boring were collected and retained for chemical analysis. The soil samples were collected from the following intervals. Surface to 0.30 meters (1.0 feet) B
43、GS 0.46 to 0.76meters (1.5 to 2.5 feet) BGS 0.91 to 1.22 meters (3.0 to 4.0 feet) BGS Soil samples were labeled with the boring number, and the sample collection depth. For example, “BP-01-(1.5-2.5)” represents the first boring collected at a depth of 0.46 to 0.76meters(1.5 to 2.5 feet) BGS. A total
44、 of 34 soil samples were collected during this investigation. The direct push samples were collected directly from a 2.5centimeter (1inch) diameter direct-push rod containing an acetate sleeve. The sleeve was cut into discreet sample intervals as described above, and immediately capped and labeled.
45、Following sample collection, the borings were backfilled with the remaining borehole cuttings.The ADL soil samples were labeled, packaged and stored on ice in an insulated chest for transport under chain-of-custody manifest to a California-certified analytical laboratory. Drilling and sampling proce
46、dures are presented in Appendix A.All drilling and sampling equipment was washed prior to use. In addition, to minimize cross-contamination between borings, all appropriate downhole drilling and sampling equipment was washed between borings. Wash water generated during the field investigation was poured onto the ground, avoiding storm drains or conduits to surface water bodies, and was allowed to soak into the soil. Solutions were poured onto the ground in such a way as to avoid runoff.The horizontal and vertical locations of the borings were established using a Trimble GPS Pathfi
