hcc lower aquifer ri report final 082012...aug 20, 2012  · the locations of soil bor ings,...

82

Upload: others

Post on 03-Jul-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 2: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 3: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

ii�

��

TABLE�OF�CONTENTS� PAGE�

LIST�OF�TABLES�................................................................................................................................�iii�

LIST�OF�FIGURES�..............................................................................................................................�iv�

LIST�OF�ACRONYMS�AND�ABBREVIATIONS�.....................................................................................�vi�

EXECUTIVE�SUMMARY�..................................................................................................................�viii�

1.0� INTRODUCTION�................................................................................................................�1�1�

2.0� BACKGROUND�..................................................................................................................�2�1�

2.1� FACILITY�AND�LAND�USE�.....................................................................................................�2�1�

2.2� REGIONAL�SETTING�............................................................................................................�2�1�

2.3� WATER�RESOURCES�...........................................................................................................�2�2�

3.0� INVESTIGATION�AND�WORK�SUMMARY�.........................................................................�3�1�

3.1� LOWER�AQUIFER�INVESTIGATION�.........................................................................................�3�1�

3.2� SUMMARY�OF�LOWER�AQUIFER�REMEDIAL�INVESTIGATION�WORK�............................................�3�1�

3.3� PRIOR�DOCUMENTS�...........................................................................................................�3�2�

4.0� INVESTIGATION�FINDINGS�AND�CONCEPTUAL�SITE�MODEL�............................................�4�1�

4.1� ENVIRONMENTAL�SETTING�..................................................................................................�4�1�

4.1.1� GEOLOGIC�AND�HYDROGEOLOGIC�UNITS.........................................................................�4�1�

4.1.2� GROUNDWATER�GRADIENTS�.........................................................................................�4�1�

4.1.3� LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUND�WATER�AGE�.........................................................................�4�2�

4.1.4� WATER�QUALITY�TYPES�................................................................................................�4�2�

4.2� POTENTIAL�SOURCES�..........................................................................................................�4�4�

4.3� POTENTIAL�MIGRATION�PATHWAYS�.....................................................................................�4�4�

4.3.1� NATURE�AND�EXTENT�OF�CONSTITUENTS�IN�GROUNDWATER�.............................................�4�4�

4.3.2� POTENTIAL�MIGRATION�PATHWAYS�...............................................................................�4�5�

5.0� SUMMARY�AND�CONCLUSIONS�.......................................................................................�5�1�

6.0� REFERENCES�.....................................................................................................................�6�1�

� �

Page 4: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

iii�

��

LIST�OF�TABLES�

Table�2�1� HCC�Treated�Wastewater�Analytical�Summary�

Table�3�1� Lower�Aquifer�Groundwater�Analytical�Results�Summary��

Table�3�2� Data�Qualifier�Definitions�

� �

� �

Page 5: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

iv�

��

LIST�OF�FIGURES�

Figure�1�1� Site�Location�Map�

Figure�2�1� Site�Plan�

Figure�2�2� Regional�Land�Use�

Figure�2�3� Site�and�Vicinity�Land�Use�

Figure�2�4� Wastewater�and�Former�Primary�Land�Use�Timeline�

Figure�2�5� Physiographic�Setting�

Figure�2�6� Map�of�Geologic�Units�and�Corcoran�Clay�Extent�

Figure�2�7� San�Joaquin�Valley�Groundwater�Basin�

Figure�2�8� Regional�Well�Locations�

Figure�2�9� Supply�Well�Locations�

Figure�4�1a� Cross�Section�A�A’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1b� Cross�Section�B�B’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1c� Cross�Section�C�C’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1d� Cross�Section�D�D’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�2� B�Aquitard�Isopach�

Figure�4�3a� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2010)�

Figure�4�3b� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2011)�

Figure�4�3c� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2012)�

Figure�4�4a� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(April�2010)�

Figure�4�4b� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(July�2011)�

Figure�4�4c� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(April�2012)�

Figure�4�5a� Upper�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Charts�

Figure�4�5b� Upper�to�Lower�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Charts�

Figure�4�5c� Lower�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Chart�

Page 6: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

v�

��

LIST�OF�FIGURES�

Figure�4�6� Lower�Aquifer�Age�Dating�Monitoring�Well�Locations�

Figure�4�7� Lower�Aquifer�Tri�Linear�Diagram�

Figure�4�8� Stiff�Diagrams�Upper�and�Lower�Aquifers�(2010�Averaged�Data)�

Figure�4�9a� Iodide�vs.�Chloride�

Figure�4�9b� Iodide�vs.�Sodium�

Figure�4�10a� Lower�Aquifer�Iodide�and�Chloride�Concentrations�

Figure�4�10b� Upper�Aquifer�Iodide�and�Chloride�Concentrations�

Figure�4�11� Estimated�Area�of�Elevated�Regional�TDS�Levels�

Figure�4�12� Total�Dissolved�Solids�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)��

Figure�4�13� Chloride�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)�

Figure�4�14� Sodium�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)�

Figure�4�15� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�23�

Figure�4�16� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�26�

Figure�4�17� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�27�

Figure�4�18� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�28�

Figure�4�29� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�38�

Figure�4�20� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�40�

Figure�4�21� IN�1�Vicinity�Grab�Groundwater�Data�

� �

Page 7: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

vi�

��

LIST�OF�ACRONYMS�

AGR� agricultural�supply�

CAO� Cleanup�and�Abatement�Order�

CFC� chlorofluorocarbon�

COC� constituent�of�concern�

CSM� Conceptual�Site�Model�

CVRWQCB� Central�Valley�Regional�Water�Quality�Control�Board�

DWR� Department�of�Water�Resources�

ft� feet�

ft�bgs� feet�below�ground�surface�

fpm� feet�per�minute�

Fm� Formation�

GAMA� Groundwater�Ambient�Monitoring�and�Assessment�

gpm� gallons�per�minute�

HCC� Hilmar�Cheese�Company�

IND� industrial�service�supply�

JJ&A� Jacobson�James�&�Associates,�Inc.�

m� meter�

mg/L� milligrams�per�liter�

MUN� municipal�and�domestic�supply�

NWIS� National�Water�Information�System�

PRO� industrial�process�supply�

RI� Remedial�Investigation�

RI�Summary�Report� Remedial�Investigation�Summary�Report�

Page 8: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

vii�

��

LIST�OF�ACRONYMS�

SF6� sulfur�hexafluoride�

Site� Hilmar�Cheese�Company�Facility�

TDS� total�dissolved�solids�

TGBA� Turlock�Groundwater�Basin�Association�

TID� Turlock�Irrigation�District�

USGS� United�States�Geological�Survey�

WDR� Waste�Discharge�Requirement�

Page 9: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

viii�

��

EXECUTIVE�SUMMARY�

Lower�Aquifer�remedial�investigation�(RI)�activities�were�performed�for�the�Hilmar�Cheese�Company�(HCC)�

facility�located�at�9001�Lander�Avenue�in�Hilmar,�California�(the�Site)�pursuant�to�Cleanup�and�Abatement�

Order� No.� R5�2004�0722� (CAO)� issued� by� the� Central� Valley� Regional� Water� Quality� Control� Board�

(CVRWQCB)�on�December�2,�2004.��The�objective�of�the�RI�work�was�to�evaluate�the�potential�source(s)�and�

extent� of� salt1� impact� to� the� Lower� Aquifer,� with� a� focus� on� evaluating� the� potential� for� historic� HCC�

discharges�being�the�source.���

The�RI�work�performed�was�in�accordance�with�CVRWQCB�approved�work�plans�and�included�the�following:����

� Sixteen�soil�borings�with�geophysical�logging;��

� Collection�of�six�soil�samples�for�physical�properties�testing;�

� Collection�of�70�Hydropunch®�grab�groundwater�samples�for�chemical�analyses�including�a�focused�

vertical�characterization�program�in�the�vicinity�of�the�former�HCC�supply�well�IN�1�to�evaluate�the�

potential�for�the�former�IN�1�to�have�provided�a�vertical�migration�pathway�from�the�Upper�Aquifer�

to�the�Lower�Aquifer;��

� Construction�and�development�of�eight�Lower�Aquifer�monitoring�wells;��

� Groundwater�monitoring�to�evaluate�horizontal�and�vertical�groundwater�gradients;�

� Vertical� water� flow� measurements� in� the� former� HCC� supply� well� IN�2� to� evaluate� the� potential�

for�vertical�migration�of�Upper�Aquifer�groundwater�into�the�Lower�Aquifer;��

� Collection�of�113�groundwater�samples�from�monitoring�and�supply�wells�for�chemical�analyses;���

� Groundwater�age�dating�on�four�monitoring�well�samples�and�two�grab�groundwater�samples;�and,��

� Review�of� regional� studies�and� reports� regarding�potential� regional� sources�of� salt� impact� to� the�

Lower�Aquifer.���

The�analytical�groundwater�data�indicate�that�chloride�comprises�the�majority�of�the�total�dissolved�solids�

(TDS)�within�the�Lower�Aquifer.��The�collective�technical�findings�from�all�lines�of�investigation�indicate�that�

the�HCC�discharges�could�not�have�been�a�significant�source�of�the�chloride�in�the�Lower�Aquifer.�

������������������������������������������������������������1�Salt�is�defined�herein�as�the�anions�and�cations�collectively�quantified�as�TDS.��

Page 10: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

ix�

��

1. Age� dating� performed� using� sulfur� hexafluoride� (SF6)� and� chlorofluorocarbon� (CFC)� analyses�

indicated� that� the� sources� for� recharge� of� the� Lower� Aquifer� include� groundwater� greater� than�

40�years�but�less�than�70�years2�in�age.��The�HCC�operations�started�in�1986�(i.e.,�26�years�ago),�and�

as�such�there�are�either�no�HCC�contributions�or�the�contributions�are�so�minimal� that�SF6� is�not�

detected�within�the�Lower�Aquifer�groundwater.���

2. The� data� from� the� IN�1� vicinity� characterization� identified� higher� concentrations� of� dissolved�

constituents�(including�chloride,�sodium,�and�TDS)�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�than�in�the�Upper�Aquifer;�

the� data� indicate� that� the� IN�1� construction� did� not� provide� a� significant� migration� pathway�

between�the�Upper�Aquifer�groundwater�and�the�Lower�Aquifer.���

3. There�is�no�documented�historic�slug�source�(i.e.,�HCC�wastewater�discharge)�or�current�continuing�

source� (i.e.,� Upper� Aquifer� groundwater)� of� sufficient� magnitude� to� result� in� the� chloride�

concentrations�detected�in�the�Lower�Aquifer.���

4. There� are� differences� in� the� Upper� Aquifer� and� Lower� Aquifer� water� quality� types� indicating�

different� water� sources� and� the� potential� for� a� natural� source� of� elevated� chloride� in� the� Lower�

Aquifer:�

a. The�Lower�Aquifer�presents�a�chloride�rich�water�quality�signature�in�Lower�Aquifer�supply�

wells�upgradient�and�outside�of�any�potential�HCC�influence.�

b. There� is� a� strong� correlation� of� iodide�to�chloride� and� iodide�to�sodium� in� the� Lower�

Aquifer,� indicating� a� possible� natural� source� for� the� observed� chloride� and� sodium.��

No�such� relationship� was� observed� for� the� Upper� Aquifer� groundwater� where� neither�

chloride�nor�sodium�detections�correlated�with�iodide�detections.��

Based�on�the�RI�results,�no�further�evaluation�of�the�Lower�Aquifer�is�warranted.� �The�findings�have�been�

compiled� into� this� RI� Summary� Report� as�a� means� of�documenting� the� completion�of� the� Lower� Aquifer�

investigation�and�fully�addressing�the�CAO�requirements�for�the�Lower�Aquifer.���

������������������������������������������������������������2�Age�dating�for�older�groundwater�contribution�was�not�performed.�

Page 11: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

1�1�

��

1.0 INTRODUCTION�

Jacobson�James�&�Associates,�Inc.�(JJ&A)�has�prepared�this�Lower�Aquifer�Remedial�Investigation�Summary�

Report� (RI�Summary� Report)� on� behalf� of� Hilmar� Cheese� Company� (HCC)� for� the� HCC� facility� located� at�

9001�Lander�Avenue� in� Hilmar,� Merced� County,� California� just� north� of� the� town� of� Hilmar� as� shown� on�

Figure� 1�1� (the� Site).� � The� RI� Summary� Report� is� submitted� in� response� to� the� California� Valley� Regional�

Water� Quality� Control� Board� (CVRWQCB)� letter� dated� June� 20,� 2012,� and� in� accordance� with� the�

December�2,�2004�Cleanup�and�Abatement�Order�No.�R5�2004�0722�(CAO).���

The�RI�Summary�Report�provides�a�summary�of�Lower�Aquifer�investigation�activities�and�findings�based�on�

the�previously�submitted�work�plans�and�reports.��The�RI�Summary�Report�is�organized�as�follows:�

Section� � Description�

1.0� � Introduction��

2.0� � Background�

3.0� � Investigation�and�Work�Summary��

5.0�� � Investigation�Findings�and�Conceptual�Site�Model�

6.0� � Summary�and�Conclusions�

7.0� � References�

Page 12: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

2�1�

��

2.0 BACKGROUND�

2.1 FACILITY�AND�LAND�USE��

The�HCC�facility�was�constructed�in�1985�and�currently�comprises�approximately�77�acres,�including�the�HCC�

processing� plant� and� associated� buildings.� � The� Site� is� comprised� of� the� facility� and� the� adjacent� former�

Primary� Lands� as� shown� on� Figure� 2�1.� � As� shown� on� Figures� 2�2� and� 2�3,� agriculture� represents� the�

predominant�land�use�both�regionally�and�in�the�vicinity�of�the�Site.����

Facility� wastewater� discharge� locations,� including� the� former� holding/percolation� pond� and� the� Primary�

Lands,� are� shown� on� Figure� 2�1.� � Beginning� in� 1985,� facility� wastewater� was� discharged� to� the� former�

holding/percolation�pond�shown�on�Figure�2�4.� �Beginning� in�1989,� facility�wastewater�was�discharged�to�

areas�identified�as�Primary�Lands.��Up�to�and�through�1987,�the�wastewater�discharge�was�regulated�by�the�

Merced� County� Environmental� Health� Department.� � In� 1988,� the� responsibility� was� assumed� by� the�

CVRWQCB.� � Application� of� wastewater� through� January� 2010� was� regulated� under� Waste� Discharge�

Requirement� (WDR)� Nos.�89�028,� 90�123,� 92�156,� 94�276,� 97�206,� and� R5�2006�0025.� � Application� of�

treated� wastewater� is� currently� regulated� under� WDR� Order� No.� R5�2010�0008� and� is� applied� to� areas�

identified�in�the�WDRs�as�Reuse�Areas.��Discharge�of�the�partially�treated�wastewater�to�the�Primary�Lands�

ceased�on�December�13,�2010�and�these�areas�are�referred�to�as�the�Former�Primary�Lands.�

The�quality�and�volume�of�the�wastewater�application�to�the�Former�Primary�Lands�varied�over�time,�as�did�

the� size� and� location� of� the� Former� Primary� Lands.� � Table� 2�1� provides� an� analytical� summary� of� key�

constituents� in� the� facility� wastewater� applied� to� the� Former� Primary� Lands� between� 1991� and� 2010.��

Figure�2�4� provides� a� timeline� depicting� the� changes� in� the� wastewater� quality� and� volumes,� and� the�

changes�to�the�Former�Primary�Land�layout�and�acreage.���

2.2 REGIONAL�SETTING�

The�Site�is�located�in�the�northern�portion�of�the�San�Joaquin�Valley�at�an�elevation�of�approximately�90�feet�

above�mean�sea�level.��The�San�Joaquin�Valley�gradually�slopes�westward�from�the�Sierra�Nevada�Mountain�

Range� to� the� San� Joaquin� River.� � As� shown� on� Figure� 2�5,� the� Site� is� located� on� a� low� alluvial� plain�

approximately�4�miles�north�of�the�Merced�River�and�8�miles�east�of�the�San�Joaquin�River.���

The� Site� is� situated� on� the� floor� of� the� San� Joaquin� Valley� in� an� area� underlain� predominantly� by�

unconsolidated� fluvial� and� lacustrine� deposits.� � As� shown� on� Figure� 2�6,� the� Site� is� located� in� an� area�

mapped� by� the� United� States� Geological� Survey� (USGS)� (Burrow,� et� al,� 2004)� as� the� Modesto� Formation�

(Fm).��The�Modesto�Fm�consists�of�alluvial�sediments�that�host�unconfined�to�semi�confined�groundwater�in�

the�vicinity�of�the�Site�(Burrow,�et�al,�2004).��The�primary�source�of�present�day�recharge�to�the�Modesto�Fm�

in� the� vicinity� of� the� Site� is� irrigation� water� (Burrow,� et� al,� 2004).� � Irrigation� practices� combined� with�

extensive�groundwater�extraction�from�deeper�aquifers�in�the�area�results�in�a�significant�downward�vertical�

Page 13: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

2�2�

��

gradient�in�the�region�(Burrow,�et�al,�2004)�and�in�the�vicinity�of�the�Site�as�measured�in�Site�specific�well�

pairs�discussed�in�Section�4.1.2.���

The�aquifer�system�present�in�the�Modesto�Fm�is�separated�from�the�deeper�aquifer�system�of�the�Turlock�

Lake�Fm�by�the�Corcoran�Clay.��The�Corcoran�Clay�is�a�fine�grained�lacustrine�deposit�in�the�upper�portion�of�

the�Turlock�Lake�Fm�estimated�to�be�up�to�50�feet�thick�in�the�vicinity�of�the�Site.��The�Corcoran�Clay,�also�

known�locally�as�the�“Blue�Clay”�or�“E�Clay”,�is�laterally�extensive�and�reported�to�significantly�impede�the�

vertical�movement�of�groundwater.� �The�Corcoran�Clay�has�been�observed�beneath�the�Site�at�depths�of�

110�to�160�feet� below� ground� surface� (ft�bgs)� (JJ&A,� 2010a).� � Figure� 2�6� indicates� the� estimated� lateral�

extent�of�the�Corcoran�Clay�in�the�region.� �The�Corcoran�Clay�is�the�defining�hydrogeologic�feature�at�the�

Site�separating�the�aquifer�systems�into�the�Upper�Aquifer�(above�the�Corcoran�Clay)�and�the�Lower�Aquifer�

(below�the�Corcoran�Clay).��

2.3 WATER�RESOURCES�

The�Site�is�located�in�the�San�Joaquin�Valley�Groundwater�Basin,�Turlock�Sub�Basin�as�shown�on�Figure�2�7.��

The� Turlock� Sub�Basin� is� bounded� to� the� north,� west� and� south� by� the� Tuolumne,� San� Joaquin� and�

Merced�Rivers,� respectively.� � The� beneficial� uses� of� the� groundwater� within� the� Turlock� Sub�Basin� and�

underlying�the�Site�are�identified�in�The�Water�Quality�Control�Plan�(Basin�Plan)�for�the�California�Regional�

Water�Quality�Control�Board,�Central�Valley�Region,�Fourth�Edition�(the�“Basin�Plan”,�[CVRWQCB,�2007])�as�

follows:�

� Municipal�and�Domestic�Supply�(MUN)�–�Water�supply�for�community,�military,�or�individual�use;�

� Agricultural�Supply�(AGR)�–�Uses�of�water�for�farming,�horticulture,�or�ranching�including,�but�not�

limited� to,� irrigation� (including� leaching� of� salts),� stock� watering,� or� support� of� vegetation� for�

range�grazing;�

� Industrial�Service�Supply�(IND)�–�Uses�of�water�for�industrial�activities�that�do�not�depend�primarily�

on�water�quality�including,�but�not�limited�to,�mining,�cooling�water�supply,�hydraulic�conveyance,�

gravel�washing,�fire�protection,�or�oil�well�re�pressurization;�and,�

� Industrial� Process� Supply� (PRO)� –� Uses� of�water� for� industrial� activities� that� depend� primarily�on�

water�quality.��

Groundwater� is� used� in� the� vicinity� of� the� Site� for� domestic,� irrigation,� and� industrial� process� supplies�

(Burrow,�et�al,�2004).� �Figure�2�8�depicts�the� locations�and�density�of�reported�supply�wells� in�the�region�

based�on�well�logs�filed�with�the�Department�of�Water�Resources�(DWR).��This�figure�also�identifies�the�wells�

used� in�the�California�Groundwater�Ambient�Monitoring�and�Assessment�(GAMA)�program,� implemented�

by� the�USGS� in� cooperation�with� the�California�State�Water�Resources�Control�Board� (Landon,�M.K.,�and�

Belitz,�Kenneth,�2008).���

Page 14: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

2�3�

��

Figure�2�9�identifies�the�locations�of�supply�wells�at�and�in�the�immediate�vicinity�of�the�Site�based�on�DWR�

records,�prior�Site�work� (B&C,�2005),�and� field� reconnaissance�by� JJ&A� (JJ&A,�2010d).� � Supply�wells�have�

been�installed�to�extract�groundwater�from�the�Upper�Aquifer�and�the�Lower�Aquifer.��Several�of�the�supply�

wells�have�been�constructed�such�that�their�screened�intervals�and/or�their�filter�packs�connect�the�discrete�

aquifer� systems� across� the� Corcoran� Clay.� � These� wells� present� potential� pathways� for� groundwater� to�

migrate�between�discrete�aquifers.���

As�shown�on�Figure�2�6,�there�are�no�natural�surface�water�bodies�such�as�creeks,�streams,�rivers,�lakes,�or�

wetlands� proximal� to� the� Site.� � Based� on� this,� there� are� no� surface� water� bodies� affected� by� the�

Site�discharge.�����

Page 15: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

3�1�

��

3.0 INVESTIGATION�AND�WORK�SUMMARY�

3.1 LOWER�AQUIFER�INVESTIGATION��

Investigation� of� the� Lower� Aquifer� was� performed� in� response� to� CVRWQCB� requests� to� evaluate� the�

potential�for�HCC�historic�wastewater�discharges�to�have�been�the�source�of�elevated�total�dissolved�solids�

(TDS)� in� the�Lower�Aquifer.� �Data� relevant� to� the�Lower�Aquifer� evaluation�have�been� produced� through�

prior�investigation�activities�focused�on�the�Upper�Aquifer.��However,�it�was�necessary�to�supplement�this�

data� with� Lower� Aquifer� specific� investigations� which� were� performed� in� accordance� with� the� following�

CVRWQCB�approved�work�plans:�

� Updated� Lower� Aquifer� Source� and� Extent� Evaluation� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��JJ&A;�July�6,�2010;�and,�

� Lower� Aquifer� Evaluation� Update� and� Data� Gaps� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��JJ&A;�September�22,�2011.�

3.2 SUMMARY�OF�LOWER�AQUIFER�REMEDIAL�INVESTIGATION�WORK��

Investigation�work�that�provided�data�relevant�to�the�Lower�Aquifer�included:��

� Installation�of�sixteen�soil�borings�with�geophysical�logging;��

� Collection�of�six�soil�samples�for�physical�properties�testing;�

� Collection�of�70�Hydropunch®�grab�groundwater�samples�for�chemical�analyses�including�a�focused�

vertical�characterization�program�in�the�vicinity�of�the�former�HCC�supply�well�IN�1�to�evaluate�the�

potential�for�the�former�IN�1�to�have�provided�a�vertical�migration�pathway�from�the�Upper�Aquifer�

to�the�Lower�Aquifer;��

� Construction�and�development�of�eight�Lower�Aquifer�monitoring�wells;��

� Groundwater�monitoring�to�evaluate�horizontal�and�vertical�groundwater�gradients;��

� Vertical�water�flow�measurements�in�the�former�HCC�supply�well�IN�2�to�evaluate�the�potential�for�

vertical�migration�of�Upper�Aquifer�groundwater�into�the�Lower�Aquifer;��

� Collection�of�113�groundwater�samples�from�monitoring�and�supply�wells�for�chemical�analyses;���

� Groundwater�age�dating�of�two�grab�groundwater�samples�and�four�monitoring�well�samples;��

� Review�of�regional�studies�and�reports�regarding�potential� regional�sources�of�TDS� impact� to� the�

Lower�Aquifer;�and,�

Page 16: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

3�2�

��

� Review�and�evaluation�of�well�construction�and�water�quality�data�for�Lower�Aquifer�wells� in�the�

regional�vicinity�of�the�Site.��

� A�total�of�453�well�completion�reports�were�obtained�from�the�DWR�for�the�Site�vicinity�

and� reviewed;� 80� Lower� Aquifer� wells� were� identified,� 10� of� which� had� filter� packs� and�

screened�intervals�completed�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�alone.�

� Well�information�was�obtained�from�the�USGS�National�Water�Information�System�(NWIS):�

Web�Interface;�sixteen�wells�were�identified�through�NWIS�for�the�Site�vicinity.�

� GeoTracker�was�reviewed�for�wells�located�in�the�vicinity�of�the�Site�which�were�properly�

constructed� in� the� Lower� Aquifer.� � No� wells� were� identified� through� the�

GeoTracker�search.�

� Turlock�Irrigation�District�(TID)�provided�analytical�data�for�172�well�locations�within�their�

jurisdiction�for�the�period�of�time�of�1999�through�2009.���

� Analytical�data�for�wells�identified�through�the�NWIS�was�obtained�from�the�NWIS.���

� The� sample� locations� identified� by� TID� and� obtained� from� the� NWIS� could� not� be�

definitively� correlated� with� the� DWR� identified� well� locations� as� TID� and� NWIS� use� a�

sample� identification� system� that� does� not� include� the� DWR� log� reference� number.��

As�such,� DWR� well� locations� were� geospatially� compared� with� TID� and� NWIS�

sample�locations.�

The� locations� of� soil� borings,� Hydropunch®� samples,� and� monitoring� wells� are� provided� on� Figure� 2�1.��

The�Lower� Aquifer� grab� and� monitoring� well� groundwater� sample� results� are� summarized� in� Table� 3�1.��

Data�qualifier�definitions�are�defined�in�Table�3�2.�

Data� validation� was� performed� throughout� the� investigation� activities� to� verify� that� the� data� were�

acceptable� and� of� sufficiently� high� quality� for� investigation� decision� making� purposes.� � Data� validation�

reports�were�included�with�the�historical�reports�referenced�in�Section�3.3,�to�discuss�the�data�evaluation�

and�present�the�findings.��All�data�were�determined�to�be�usable,�as�qualified,�for�the�investigation�related�

decision�making�purposes,�with�the�exception�of�one�nitrate�nitrogen�result�(sample�collected�from�MW�38�

on�December�28,�2010).���

3.3 PRIOR�DOCUMENTS�

The� following� documents,� previously� submitted� to� the� CVRWQCB,� describe� the� work� performed� and�

present�the�investigation�results�obtained�through�the�Site�investigation�activities�which�comprise�the�basis�

of�the�information�presented�herein.�

Page 17: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

3�3�

��

� Preliminary� Conceptual� Site� Model� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�October�1,�2008.��

� Addendum�to�Supply�Well�Evaluation�Technical�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

JJ&A;�June�8,�2009.�

� Supply� Well� Data� Gaps� Update� Technical� Memorandum,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��JJ&A;�October�5,�2009.�

� Extended� Water� Level� Survey� Technical� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�November�5,�2009.�

� Interim� Data� Deliverable� and� Data� Gap� Update,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�December�9,�2009.�

� Second�Interim�Data�Deliverable�and�Data�Gap�Update,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

JJ&A;�February�12,�2010.�

� Addendum� to� Second� Interim� Data� Deliverable� and� Data� Gap� Update,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��JJ&A;�April�15,�2010.�

� Lower�Aquifer�Source�and�Extent�Evaluation�Work�Plan,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

JJ&A;�May�14,�2010.�

� Remedial� Investigation� Report� [Upper� Aquifer],� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�June�18,�2010.�

� Lower�Aquifer�Private�Well�Sampling�and�Analysis�Plan,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

JJ&A;�June�23,�2010.�

� Lower� Aquifer� Source� and� Extent� Evaluation� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�March�29,�2011.�

� Lower� Aquifer� Evaluation� Update� and� Data� Gaps� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��JJ&A;�September�22,�2011�

� Lower� Aquifer� Data� Gap� Investigation� Status� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,� California.��

JJ&A;�June�6,�2012.�

Page 18: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

3�4�

��

In� addition� to� the� documents� listed� above,� submittals� to� the� CVRWQCB� providing� data� relevant� to� the�

Lower�Aquifer�investigation�included�the�annual�supply�well�sampling�data�transmittals�for�2010�and�2011�

and�the�quarterly�monitoring�and�sampling�data�transmittals�submitted�since�the�third�quarter�of�2010.�

Page 19: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

4�1�

��

4.0 INVESTIGATION�FINDINGS�AND�CONCEPTUAL�SITE�MODEL�

As� identified� in�Section�3.3,�detailed�results�of�the� investigation�work�relevant�to�this�RI�Summary�Report�

have�been�presented�in�prior�submittals.��A�summary�of�the�Lower�Aquifer�investigation�findings�is�provided�

herein�within�the�context�of�the�Conceptual�Site�Model�(CSM)�framework.��

4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL�SETTING�

4.1.1 GEOLOGIC�AND�HYDROGEOLOGIC�UNITS�

The� subsurface� is� comprised� of� several� defined� lithologic� units� as� illustrated� in� the� four� cross� sections�

presented�as�Figures�4�1a�through�4�1d.��Cross�section�A�A’�characterizes�lithologies�along�the�groundwater�

flow�axis�in�a�northeast�southwest�direction.��Cross�sections�B�B’,�C�C’,�and�D�D’�present�east�west�transects�

across� the�central�portion�of� the�HCC�Site,�near� the�southern�boundary�of� the�HCC�site�and�south�of� the�

HCC�Site,�respectively.�

The� hydrostratigraphic� units� have� been� divided� based� on� the� various� lithologies� encountered,� their�

respective�lateral�continuity�and�groundwater�occurrence.��The�eight�(8)�hydrostratigraphic�units�defined�for�

the� Site� are,� in� order� of� increasing� depth� below� grade:� (1)� Vadose� zone;� (2)� A�Zone;� (3)� A�Aquitard;�

(4)�B�Zone;� (5)� B�Aquitard;� (6)�C�Zone;� (7)� C�Aquitard;� and,� (8)� D�Zone.� � The� B�Aquitard� is� a� laterally�

continuous�clay�unit�encountered�at�an�approximate�depth�range�of�110�to�160�ft�bgs�in�the�vicinity�of�the�

Site�and�appears�to�dip�slightly�to�the�south�and�west.� �This�unit�correlates�with,�and�is� interpreted�to�be�

analogous�to,�the�Corcoran�Clay.��The�units�beneath�the�Site�correlate�with�the�Modesto�and�Turlock�Lake�

Fms,�noted�in�studies�of�the�USGS�(Burrow,�et�al,�2004)�and�the�California�DWR�(DWR,�2003).�

As�shown�in�cross�section�C�C’�(Figure�4�1c)�the�B�Aquitard�is�a�significant�lithologic�feature�separating�the�

Upper� Aquifer� and� Lower� Aquifer� zones.� � Figure� 4�2� illustrates� the� observed� thickness� of� the� B�Aquitard�

beneath,�and�in�the�vicinity�of,�the�HCC�Site.��This�figure�presents�lithologic�data�from�both�monitoring�well�

and� supply� well� lithologic� and� geophysical� logs.� � A� review� of� this� figure� indicates� that� the� B�Aquitard� is�

laterally�extensive�and�varies�from�approximately�10�to�100�feet�thick�in�the�areas�south�and�southwest�of�

the�Site.�

4.1.2 GROUNDWATER�GRADIENTS��

The� horizontal� gradient� within� the� Lower� Aquifer� is� very� flat� and� the� flow� direction� is� generally� to� the�

southwest.��Because�the�horizontal�gradient�is�so�flat,�the�flow�direction�can�be�affected�by�fluctuations�in�

groundwater� elevation� caused� by� pumping� well� operations.� � Figures� 4�3a� through� 4�3c� provide� Lower�

Aquifer�potentiometric�surface�maps�representing�the�winter,�when�there�is�little�to�no�irrigation�and�little�

to�no�irrigation�supply�well�use.��Conversely,�irrigation�and�irrigation�supply�well�use�is�typically�occurring�in�

the� spring� (May� –� June)� and� is� at� peak� levels� in� the� summer� (July� –� August).� � Figures� 4�4a� through� 4�4c�

provide�Lower�Aquifer�potentiometric�surface�maps�representative�of�the�irrigation�season.�

Page 20: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

4�2�

��

Vertical� gradients� are� illustrated� in� Figures� 4�5a,� 4�5b,� and� 4�5c� for� the� Upper� Aquifer,� between� the�

Upper�Aquifer�and�Lower�Aquifer�(i.e.,�across�the�Corcoran�Clay)�and�within�the�Lower�Aquifer,�respectively.��

The�Corcoran�Clay�separates�the�Upper�Aquifer�and�the�Lower�Aquifer�into�two�distinct�hydrostratigraphic�

units�and�impedes,�but�does�not�eliminate,�vertical�flow�between�them.��As�shown,�the�vertical�gradients�

are� predominantly� downward;� although� an� upward� gradient� has� been� present� at� the� Upper� Aquifer�

MW�17/MW�29�well�pair�located�southwest�of�the�Site�since�2011.�

4.1.3 LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�AGE��

The�sulfur�hexafluoride�and�chlorofluorocarbon�(SF6/CFC)�methods�used�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�investigation�

are�appropriate�for�age�dating�of�young�groundwater�(i.e.,�groundwater�<�50�years�old),�as�detailed�in�the�

Lower�Aquifer�Evaluation�Update�and�Data�Gaps�Work�Plan�(JJ&A,�2011b).��Groundwater�can�be�comprised�

of� recharge� from� multiple� sources� of� various� ages,� and� a� mixed� age� result� occurs� in� these� cases.��

However,�if�the�Lower�Aquifer�contains�young�groundwater�then�some�detection�of�SF6�and�CFCs�would�be�

expected.��No�SF6�detection�indicates�that�either�the�groundwater�does�not�contain�any�water�younger�than�

40�years�or�that�the�contribution�of�water�of�this�age�range�is�not�sufficient�for�a�detection�of�SF6.�

Figure� 4�6� provides� the� estimated� mixed� age� for� the� Lower� Aquifer� groundwater� sample� locations.��

As�shown,�the�age�estimates�ranged�from�31�33�years�at�MW�26�to�63�65�years�at�MW�23.��As�previously�

reported�(JJ&A,�2012),�there�were�no�detections�of�SF6�in�any�of�the�groundwater�samples�collected�from�

the�Site�but�there�were�detections�of�CFCs.��The�absence�of�SF6�detections�indicates�that�either�the�source�

for�the�recharge�of�the�Lower�Aquifer�is�greater�than�40�years�(as�of�the�February�2012�sampling�date)�or�

that� contributions� from� a� source� less� than� 40� years� is� so� minimal� as� to� result� in� no� detections� of� SF6.��

The�CFC� detections� indicate� a� contributing� source� of� Lower� Aquifer� recharge� that� is� less� than� 70� years.��

As�such,� the� data� indicate� a� contributing� Lower� Aquifer� recharge� source� that� is� greater� than� 40� years,�

but�less�than�70�years�old3.��

4.1.4 WATER�QUALITY�TYPES�

The�data�collected�indicates�that�the�Upper�Aquifer�and�Lower�Aquifer�water�quality�types�are�not�similar.��

A�Piper� diagram� (tri�linear� plot)� is� provided� as� Figure� 4�7,� showing� a� bicarbonate�rich� signature� for� the�

Upper� Aquifer� as� compared� to� a� chloride�rich� signature� for� the� Lower� Aquifer� as� previously� reported�

(JJ&A,�2010d).��In�addition�to�the�Piper�diagram,�Stiff�diagrams�have�been�prepared�for�Upper�Aquifer�and�

Lower� Aquifer� monitoring� and� supply� wells� as� shown� on� Figure� 4�8.� � The� Stiff� diagrams� provide�

representative�shapes�based�on�the�percent�of�select�ions�in�the�sampled�water,�and�as�such�provide�a�good�

means�of�visually�comparing�water�quality�types.��Review�of�Figure�4�8�indicates:�

������������������������������������������������������������3�Age�dating�of�older�groundwater�sources�was�not�performed�and�there�may�also�be�contributions�from�sources�older�than�70�years�that�were�not�identified.��

Page 21: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

4�3�

��

� Upper�Aquifer�Shallow�Zone�water�beneath�the�Site�generally�exhibits�a�bicarbonate� inflection�to�

the�right�and�a�sodium/potassium�tail�to�the�left.�

� Upper�Aquifer�Supply�Zone�water�beneath�the�Site�indicates�a�modified�signature,�likely�the�result�

of�attenuation�and�mixing�processes,�wherein�the�sodium/potassium�tail�to�the�left�is�gone�and�the�

carbonate�inflection�to�the�right�is�diminished.�

� The�Lower�Aquifer�water�beneath�and�southwest�of�the�Site�does�not�have�a�sodium/potassium�tail�

to�the�left�but�generally�does�have�a�chloride�tail�to�the�right.��This�same�shape�is�present�at�Lower�

Aquifer�locations�outside�of�HCC�influence;�IN�07�north�of�the�Site�and�DW�108�east�of�the�Site.�

From�a�trend�perspective,�the�Lower�Aquifer�water�quality�Stiff�diagrams�indicate�that�groundwater�coming�

from�the�northeast�and�east� is�of� fresher�water�quality�with�relatively� lower� levels�of�cations�and�anions,�

transitioning�to�a�more�chloride�rich�water�west�and�south�of�the�Site.��The�water�quality�signature�for�the�

two�Lower�Aquifer�well�locations�outside�of�HCC�influence�(IN�07�and�DW�108)�supports�the�conclusion�that�

HCC�is�not�a�source�of�elevated�chloride�in�the�Lower�Aquifer.�

Comparisons�of�constituents�commonly�used�to�evaluate�sources�of�salinity�were�also�performed,�including�

boron,� chloride,� and� iodide� (Izbicki� et� al,� 2006;� Richter� et� al,� 1991)� relative� to� sodium.� � There� were� no�

discernible� spatial� or� concentration� trends� or� relationships� apparent� between� boron� and� chloride�

(JJ&A,�2011a)�in�either�the�Upper�Aquifer�or�Lower�Aquifer.��However,�discernible�trends�and�relationships�

were�noted�between�iodide�and�chloride�and�between�iodide�and�sodium�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�as�follows:�

� Iodide� and� chloride:� no� trends� or� relationships� were� noted� for� the� Upper� Aquifer� but� a� strong�

spatial�and�concentration�correlation�was�observed�for�the�Lower�Aquifer�as�shown�on�Figure�4�9a;�

an� iodide� to� chloride� ratio� of� approximately� 1:1,000� was� observed� wherein� a� concentration� of�

0.1�milligrams�per� liter� (mg/L)�of� iodide�correlates�approximately� to�a�concentration�of�100�mg/L�

chloride�in�Lower�Aquifer�groundwater.�

� Iodide� and� sodium:� similar� to� the� iodide� to� chloride� finding,� there� were� no� distinctive� iodide� to�

sodium�trends�or�relationships�noted�for�the�Upper�Aquifer�but�a�strong�correlation�was�observed�

for�the�Lower�Aquifer�as�shown�on�the�graph�provided�as�Figure�4�9b.�

� Iodide�and�chloride�concentration�contours�for�the�Lower�Aquifer�and�Upper�Aquifer�are�provided�

as� Figures� 4�10a� and� 4�10b,� respectively.� � Comparison� of� the� figures� shows� that� iodide�

concentrations�are�lower�in�the�Upper�Aquifer�compared�to�the�Lower�Aquifer.��There�is�a�general�

spatial� agreement� between� elevated� iodide� and� chloride� concentrations� in� the� Upper� Aquifer,�

but�the� line� graph� (Figure� 4�9a)� indicates� the� correlation� is� weak.� � Conversely,� review� of�

Figure�4�10a�supports�the�Lower�Aquifer�line�graph�finding�that�iodide�concentrations�are�strongly�

correlated�with�chloride�concentrations�and�the�concentration�of�one�can�be�used�to�predict� the�

concentration�of�the�other�(i.e.,�R2=0.9869).�

Page 22: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

4�4�

��

The�existence�of�a�strong�iodide�to�sodium�and�iodide�to�chloride�correlation�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�indicates�

that� the� constituents� are� likely� from� a� common� and� perhaps� natural� source.� � Comparison� of� the� Upper�

Aquifer� and� Lower� Aquifer� trends� and� relationship� findings� also� indicates� different� water� quality� within�

these�two�units.�

4.2 POTENTIAL�SOURCES�

Potential� sources� of� elevated� chloride� in� Lower� Aquifer� groundwater� evaluated� through� the� RI� activities�

include� the� pre�2010� HCC� wastewater� discharges� to� the� Former� Primary� Lands� and� regional� sources� of�

increased� salinity.� � The� investigation� age�dating� results� indicate� that� the� prior� HCC� discharges� are� not� a�

significant�source�of�the�chloride�in�the�Lower�Aquifer���

Data�and�studies�regarding�regional�water�quality�conditions�and�potential�sources�have�been�identified�and�

summarized� in� the� prior� Lower� Aquifer� investigation� reports� identified� in� Section� 3.3.� � Of� particular�

importance�to�the�HCC�Lower�Aquifer�source�and�extent�evaluation�work�is�the�Turlock�Groundwater�Basin,�

Draft�Groundwater�Management�Plan�(TGBA,�2008)�which�reported�that�“The�TDS�levels�in�groundwater�in�

the� eastern� two�thirds� of� the� Basin� are� generally� less� than� 500� mg/L.� � TDS� in� groundwater� increases�

westward�towards�the�San�Joaquin�River�and�southward�towards�the�Merced�River.��In�these�areas,�high�TDS�

water�is�found�in�wells�deeper�than�350�feet.��Better�quality�groundwater�(less�than�1,000�mg/L�TDS)�in�these�

areas� is� found� at� shallower� depths.”,� and� “The� shallowest� high� TDS� groundwater� occurs� in� zones� five� to�

six�miles�wide�adjacent�and�parallel�to�the�San�Joaquin�River�and�the�lower�part�of�the�Merced�River�west�of�

Hilmar,�where�high�TDS�groundwater�is�upwelling.”��As�shown�on�Figure�4�11,�the�Site�is�located�just�outside�

of�this�described�area.��The�potential�for�a�regional�water�quality�transition�to�this�area�southwest�of�the�Site�

is� supported� by� the� investigation� data� collected� as� presented� in� Stiff� diagrams� and� iodide�chloride�

concentrations,�including�data�from�well�locations�outside�of�HCC�influence.�

4.3 POTENTIAL�MIGRATION�PATHWAYS�

4.3.1 NATURE�AND�EXTENT�OF�CONSTITUENTS�IN�LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER��

Constituent�concentration�maps�provided�as�Figures�4�12�through�4�14�present�the�concentrations�of�TDS,�

chloride,� and� sodium� in� Lower� Aquifer� groundwater.� � Chloride� in� groundwater� concentrations� are� also�

included�on�the�cross�sections�provided�as�Figures�4�1a�through�4�1d.�

Review�of�Figures�4�12�through�4�14�show�a�consistent�general�pattern�of�higher�concentrations�off�Site�to�

the�southwest�than�beneath�the�Site.��Constituent�specific�findings�are�as�follows:�

� Total� Dissolved� (Figure� 4�12):� It� is� noted� that� monitoring� well� results� correlate� well� with� grab�

groundwater� data� for� similar� depths� at� the� Lower� Aquifer� locations� south� of� the� HCC� site.��

The�highest�concentrations�of�TDS�were�detected�south�and�southwest�of�the�Site.��

Page 23: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

4�5�

��

� Chloride� (Figure�4�13):�Chloride� is�not�prone�to�attenuation�and� it� is� transported� in�groundwater,�

and�is� considered� the� primary� constituent� of� interest� in� the� Lower� Aquifer.� � The� highest�

concentrations�of�chloride�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�are�located�southwest�of�the�Site.��It�is�noted�that�

chloride�is�also�observed�to�generally�increase�in�depth�at�each�location�sampled�as�indicated�in�the�

grab�groundwater�data�provided�on�Figure�4�13�and�on�the�cross�sections�presented�as�Figures�4�1a�

through�4�1d.��

� Sodium�(Figure�4�14):�There�is�not�a�high�degree�of�variability�in�the�range�of�sodium�concentrations�

beneath�the�Site�and�off�Site�to�the�south�and�southwest.��The�highest�concentrations�of�sodium�in�

the�Lower�Aquifer�were�at�the�sample� locations�south�and�southwest�of� the�Site,�and�the� lowest�

results�were�for�samples�northeast�of�the�Site�(SB�05�and�HP�01).���

Figure� 4�15� through�Figure�4�20�provide� time�versus�concentration�graphs� for�TDS,� chloride�and�sodium;�

and�includes�hydrographs�for�the�Lower�Aquifer�wells.��

4.3.2 POTENTIAL�MIGRATION�PATHWAYS�

A�focused�vertical�characterization�investigation�was�performed�in�the�vicinity�of�the�former�HCC�supply�well�

IN�1�to�determine�if�the�IN�1�well�construction�represented�a�potential�pathway�for�shallow�groundwater�to�

migrate�to�the�Lower�Aquifer.��The�lithologic�and�analytical�results,�consistent�with�prior�Site�data,�indicated�

the� presence� of� the� Corcoran� Clay� layer� between� the� Upper� Aquifer� and� the� Lower� Aquifer.��

Chloride,�iodide,�and�TDS�were�present�at�higher�concentrations�in�the�Lower�Aquifer�as�compared�to�the�

Upper� Aquifer� as� shown� on� Figure� 4�21� for� the� SB�10� location;� and� therefore� the� source� of� these�

constituents�is�not�the�Upper�Aquifer�at�this�location.��The�data�indicate�that�the�IN�1�construction�did�not�

provide�a�migration�pathway�between�the�Upper�Aquifer�groundwater�and�the�Lower�Aquifer.�

An�intra�well�flow�evaluation�was�performed�at�the�former�HCC�supply�well�IN�2.��The�evaluation�indicated�

no�vertical�flow�within�the�well�above�the�first�screened�interval,�a�flow�rate�greater�than�1�foot�per�minute�

(fpm)�with�a�maximum�flow�rate�measured�at�approximately�3.1�fpm�(i.e.,�12.26�gallons�per�minute�[gpm])�

was�measured�at�and�below�the�first�screened�interval�to�the�bottom�of�the�second�screened�interval�

(approximately�92�to�232�feet�below�top�of�casing).���

Despite�the�IN�2�intra�well�flow�measurements,�the�data�collected�through�the�investigation�activities�

indicate�that�the�migration�of�TDS�and�chloride�through�either�well�or�through�the�Corcoran�Clay�has�not�

occurred�at�a�level�of�significance�based�on�the�age�dating�results�and�the�analytical�data.�

Page 24: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

5�1�

��

5.0 SUMMARY�AND�CONCLUSIONS�

Site�specific�geologic,�hydrogeologic,�groundwater�chemistry�and�groundwater�age�data�were�collected�to�

provide� information� relevant� to� evaluating� the� potential� source(s)� and� extent� of� salt� impact� within� the�

Lower�Aquifer�beneath�and�south�and�southwest�of�the�HCC�Site.��Additionally,�regional�studies�and�reports�

were� reviewed� to� identify� data� regarding� potential� regional� presence� and� sources� of� salt� impact� to� the�

Lower�Aquifer.��A�summary�of�the�findings�are�as�follows:�

� The�Corcoran�Clay�is�present�throughout�the�investigation�area�and�was�noted�to�thicken�locally�to�

approximately�90�feet�in�the�vicinity�of�MW�40.���

� The�vertical�groundwater�gradients�within�the�Upper�Aquifer,�across�the�Corcoran�Clay�and�within�

the�Lower�Aquifer�are�predominantly�downward.��

� The� horizontal� groundwater� gradient� within� the� Lower� Aquifer� is� very� flat� and� generally� to� the�

south�with�variations�observed�which�may�be�the�result�of�pumping�well�influences.�

� The� groundwater� flow� in� the� Lower� Aquifer� is� variable� in� the� horizontal� flow� direction�and�

predominantly� downward� in� the� vertical� direction.� � The� downward� flow� component� results�

primarily� from� seasonal� groundwater� pumping� for� irrigation.� � The� Corcoran� Clay� separates� the�

Upper� Aquifer� and� the� Lower� Aquifer� into� two� distinct� hydrostratigraphic� units� and� impedes,�

but�does�not�eliminate,�vertical�flow�between�them.�

� Chloride� is� the� primary� constituent� of� interest� based� on� magnitude� of� detection� in� the�

Lower�Aquifer,�with�the�chloride�detections�in�the�grab�and�monitoring�well�samples�ranging�from�a�

400� mg/L� to� 630� mg/L.� � The� chloride� concentrations� in� the� depth� discrete� grab� groundwater�

samples�increased�with�depth.���

� Geochemical�evaluations�of�the�major�groundwater�ion�chemistry�indicate�that�the�Upper�Aquifer�

and�Lower�Aquifer�are�not�similar.��

� The�Upper�Aquifer�and�upgradient�portions�of�the�Lower�Aquifer�exhibit�a�bicarbonate�rich�

signature�as�compared�with�the�Lower�Aquifer�water�quality�beneath�and�southwest�of�the�

Site� which� exhibits� a� chloride� rich� water� signature.� � The� chloride� rich� water� quality�

signature� was� present� in� two� Lower� Aquifer� wells� not� within� HCC� influence�

(IN�07�and�DW�108).�

� A� strong� correlation� of� iodide� to� chloride� was� observed� for� the� Lower� Aquifer� at� a�

1:1,000�ratio;�indicating�that�the�chloride�and�iodide�detections�may�be�naturally�occurring�

versus� from� an� anthropogenic� source;� a� similar� pattern� was� observed� for� the� iodide� to�

sodium�comparison.�

Page 25: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

5�2�

��

� Chloride�detections� in� the�HCC�wastewater�and�Upper�Aquifer�supply�zone�groundwater�

monitoring� wells� have� consistently� been� lower� than� the� chloride� detected� in� the�

Lower�Aquifer� monitoring� wells;� this� indicates� that� neither� the� HCC� wastewater� nor� the�

Upper�Aquifer�groundwater�are�sources�of�the�higher�chloride�concentrations�detected�in�

the�Lower�Aquifer.�

� The� chloride� detections� in� the� Lower� Aquifer� southwest� of� the� Site� are� consistently� higher� than�

those�detected� in� the�Upper�Aquifer�Supply�Zone� indicating� the�absence�of�a�continuous�source.��

Data� from� 1991� to� the� present� shows� that� average� annual� chloride� levels� have� not� exceeded�

486�mg/L.��

� The� results� of� the� lithological� and� groundwater� characterization� in� the� vicinity� of� IN�1� did� not�

indicate�that�the�well�construction�at�IN�1�was�a�migration�pathway�from�the�Upper�Aquifer�to�the�

Lower�Aquifer.�

� The� SF6� � and� CFC� analyses� indicate� that� the� sources� for� recharge� of� the� Lower� Aquifer� include�

groundwater�greater� than� 40�years�but� less� than�70�years4� in�age;� the�HCC�operations�started� in�

1986�(i.e.,�26�years�ago),�and�as�such�there�are�either�no�HCC�contributions�or�the�contributions�are�

so�minimal�that�SF6�is�not�detected�within�the�Lower�Aquifer�groundwater�composition.�

� Information�from�the�Turlock�Groundwater�Basin,�Draft�Management�Plan�(TCBA,�2008),�indicates�

that�water�quality� is�known�to�have�been�degraded�by�salts�to�the�southwest�of�the�Site�prior�to�

initiation� of� HCC� operations.� � The� potential� for� a� regional� water� quality� transition� to� this� area�

southwest�of�the�Site�is�supported�by�the�investigation�data�collected�as�presented�in�Stiff�diagrams�

and�iodide�chloride�concentrations,�including�data�from�well�locations�outside�of�HCC�influence.�

� The�Lower�Aquifer�iodide�to�chloride�and�iodide�to�sodium�relationships�suggests�a�possible�natural�

source�for�the�observed�chloride�rich�water�in�the�Lower�Aquifer.�

All� lines�of� investigation�indicate�that�HCC�is�not�the�source�of�the�elevated�chloride�which�comprises�the�

majority�of�the�TDS�observed�in�the�Lower�Aquifer.��Based�on�the�RI�data�collected,�no�further�evaluation�of�

the�Lower�Aquifer�is�warranted.��As�such,�the�requirements�of�the�CAO�have�been�fulfilled�with�regards�to�

the�Lower�Aquifer�with�the�submission�of�this�RI�Summary�Report.���

������������������������������������������������������������4�Age�dating�for�older�groundwater�contribution�was�not�performed.�

Page 26: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

6�1�

��

6.0 REFERENCES�

Brown�and�Caldwell�(B&C),�2005.��Site�Assessment�Work�Plan,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

March�2005.�

Burrow,�K.R.,�Shelton,�J.L.,�Hevesi,�J.A.,�and�Weissmann,�G.S.,�2004.��Hydrogeologic�Characterization�of�the�

Modesto�Area,�San� Joaquin�Valley,�California:�U.S.�Geological�Survey�Scientific� Investigations�Report�

2004�5232,�pp.�54.�

Central� Valley� Regional� Water� Quality� Control� Board� (CVRWQCB),� 2004.� � Cleanup� and� Abatement�

Order�No.�R5�2004�0722� for� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Inc.,� Hilmar� Whey,� Inc.,� and� Kathy� and�

Delton�Nyman�Cheese�Processing�Plant,�Merced�County.��December�2,�2004.�

CVRWQCB,� 2007.� � The� Water� Quality� Control� Plan� (Basin� Plan)� for� the� California� Regional� Water� Quality�

Control�Board,�Central�Valley�Region,�Fourth�Edition.��Revised�October�2007.�

Department�of�Water�Resources�(DWR),�2003.��California’s�Groundwater,�Bulletin�118�–�Update�2003.��

http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/groundwater/bulletin_118/california's_groundwater__bulletin_118_

�_update_2003_/bulletin118_entire.pdf.��October�2003.��

Izbicki,�John;�Metzger,�Loren,�McPherson,�Kelly,�Everett,�Rhett�and�Bennett,�George,�2006.��Sources�of�High�

Chloride� Water� to� Wells,� Eastern� San� Joaquin� Ground�Water� Subbasin,� California.� � United� States�

Geological�Survey�Open�File�Report�2006�1309.��November,�2006.�

Jacobson� James� &� Associates,� Inc.� (JJ&A),� 2008.� � Preliminary� Conceptual� Site� Model� Report,�

Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��October�1,�2008.��

JJ&A,� 2009a.� � Addendum� to� Supply� Well� Evaluation� Technical� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��June�8,�2009.�

JJ&A,� 2009b.� � Supply� Well� Data� Gaps� Update� Technical� Memorandum,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��October�5,�2009.�

JJ&A,�2009c.� �Extended�Water�Level�Survey�Technical�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

November�5,�2009.�

JJ&A,�2009d.� �Interim�Data�Deliverable�and�Data�Gap�Update,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��

December�9,�2009.�

Page 27: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

6�2�

��

JJ&A,� 2010a.� � Second� Interim� Data� Deliverable� and� Data� Gap� Update,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,� Hilmar,�

California.��February�12,�2010.�

JJ&A,� 2010b.� � Addendum� to� Second� Interim� Data� Deliverable� and� Data� Gap� Update,� Hilmar� Cheese�

Company,�Hilmar,�California.��April�15,�2010.�

JJ&A,� 2010c.� � Lower� Aquifer� Source� and� Extent� Evaluation� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��May�14,�2010.�

JJ&A,�2010d.��Remedial�Investigation�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��June�18,�2010.�

JJ&A,� 2010e.� � Lower� Aquifer� Private� Well� Sampling� and� Analysis� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��June�23,�2010.�

JJ&A,� 2010f.� � Updated� Lower� Aquifer� Source� and� Extent� Evaluation� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��July�6,�2010.�

JJ&A,� 2011a.� � Lower� Aquifer� Source� and� Extent� Evaluation� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��March�29,�2011.�

JJ&A,� 2011b.� � Lower� Aquifer� Evaluation� Update� and� Data� Gaps� Work� Plan,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��September�22,�2011.�

JJ&A,� 2012.� � Lower� Aquifer� Data� Gap� Investigation� Status� Report,� Hilmar� Cheese� Company,�

Hilmar,�California.��June�6,�2012.�

Landon,�M.K.,�and�Belitz,�Kenneth�(Landon,�Belitz),�2008.��Ground�Water�Quality�Data�in�the�Central�Eastside�

San� Joaquin� Basin� 2006:� Results� from� the� California� GAMA� Program:� U.S.� Geological� Survey�

Data�Series�325.��2008.�

Richter,� Bernd� and� Kreitler,� Charles,� 1991.� � Identification� of� Sources� of� Ground�Water� Salinization� Using�

Geochemical�Techniques.��EPA/600/2�91�064.��December,�1991.�

Turlock�Groundwater�Basin�Association�(TGBA),�2008.��Turlock�Groundwater�Basin,�Draft�Management�Plan.��

January�17,�2008.�

Page 28: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

��

TABLES

Page 29: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

��

LIST�OF�TABLES�

Table�2�1� HCC�Treated�Wastewater�Analytical�Summary�

Table�3�1� Lower�Aquifer�Groundwater�Analytical�Results�Summary��

Table�3�2� Data�Qualifier�Definitions�

Page 30: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�2�1

HCC�TREATED�WASTWATER�ANALYTICAL�SUMMARY1

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Compound units 19912 19922 19932 19943 19953 19963 19974�7 19988 19998 20009 20019 20029 20039 200410 200511 200610 200711 200811 200912 201013 Average

Alkalinity,�bicarbonate�(as�CaCO3) mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 388 332 389 227 1231 1500 1448 1455 1172 743 888

Ammonia�as�Nitrogen mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 37 23 29 25 54 62 107 76 21 7 44

BOD mg/L 2450 1976 2033 5000 3092 2880 2663 2781 3337 �� 5334 3879 4289 4086 178 645 519 205 118 15 2394

Calcium mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 120 134 126 70 120 96 89 57 93 20 93

Chloride mg/L 376 306 305 294 230 170 211 164 240 282 486 197 241 320 388 288 290 300 389 276 288

COD mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 9360 6728 6518 6968 623 2086 1572 896 582 41 3537

EC umhos/cm 2712 2160 2078 2600 1933 1783 1801 1729 1879 2070 3916 2495 2768 2720 3420 3506 3561 3610 3324 2637 2635

Iron mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 1.0 2.5 2.6 1.1 16.8 11.6 3.3 2.4 3.7 0.3 4.5

Magnesium mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 25 19 15 14 12 15 14 17 71 8 21

Nitrate�nitrogen mg/L 13 14 36 179 169 160 95 21 30 18 82 101 94 40 1.3 4 1 3 14 13 54

pH standard�units 8 11 9 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 6.5 6.7 6.7 5.7 7.9 8.1 8.0 8.0 8.2 8.2 7.8

Phosphorus,�total mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 88 73 78 89 16 64 48 51 58 9 57

Potassium mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 253 164 223 358 188 169 165 179 164 106 197

Sodium mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 679 346 384 304 499 618 586 673 618 499 521

Solids,�total�dissolved mg/L �� �� �� 3567 2575 2867 2762 2754 3374 3009 6333 4596 4885 4836 2074 2248 2100 2217 2111 1527 3167

Sulfate mg/L �� �� �� 29 21 23 24 39 25 �� 51 30 22 25 78 32 39 39 55 37 36

Sulfide mg/L �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 0.29 0.18 0.13 0.13 9.36 4.2 2.7 2.05 0.74 0.05 1.98

TKN mg/L �� �� �� 61 67 68 89 96 142 135 189 119 136 146 93 207 218 121 54 7 115

1�Treated�wastewater�applied�to�primary�lands.�2�Nolte�and�Associates,�Inc.,�Report�of�Waste�Discharge,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California,�February�1994.3�Nolte�and�Associates,�Report�of�Waste�Discharge,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California,�August�1996.4�Nolte�and�Associates,Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�California,�June�1997.�5�Nolte�and�Associates,Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�California,�November�19976�Nolte�and�Associates,Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�California,�December�1997.7�Nolte�and�Associates,Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Report,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�California,�January�19998�Brown�and�Caldwell,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Report,�April�2000.�9�HCC,�Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Reports,�January���December,�200510�Brown�and�Caldwell,��Report�of�Waste�Discharge,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.��August�2004.11�Kennedy�Jenks,�Report�of�Waste�Discharge,�Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California.�June�2008.12�HCC,�Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Reports,�January���December�2009.

���=�No�data�available

Notes:

mg/L�=�milligrams�per�liter

umhos/cm�=�micromhos�per�centimeter

13�HCC,�Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Reports,�January���March�2010�and�Quarterly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Reports,�April���December�2010.

1�of�1

Page 31: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�3�1LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�ANALYTICAL�RESULTS�SUMMARY

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Sample�Location Sample�Date Depth A

lkal

inity

,�Bic

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

0 3�(m

g/L)

Alk

alin

ity,�C

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�H

ydro

xide

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�T

otal

�as�

CaC0

3�(m

g/L)

Brom

ide�

(mg/

L)

Chlo

ride

�(mg/

L)

Cond

uctiv

ity�

(um

hos/

cm)

Dis

solv

ed�B

oron

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�C

alci

um�

(mg/

L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

agne

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�P

otas

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�S

odiu

m�

(mg/

L)

Iodi

de�(u

g/L)

Nitr

ate�

(as�

NO

3)�

(mg/

L)

Nitr

ate�

Nitr

ogen

�(m

g/L)

Solid

s,�to

tal�d

isso

lved

�(m

g/L)

Sulfa

te�(m

g/L)

Tota

l�Kje

ldah

l�N

itrog

en�(m

g/L)

DW�108 08/12/2010 NA 150 <3.0� <3.0� 150 �� 250 1100 <0.10� 26 0.31 �� 11 0.14 �� <2.0� 170 280 �� <0.44� 540 <4.0� <1.0�

DW�108 09/07/2010 NA 150 <3.0� <3.0� 150 �� 250 1000 <0.10� 24 0.24 �� 10 0.13 �� <2.0� 160 270 �� <0.44� 540 <4.0� <1.0�

DW�108 09/27/2010 NA 150 <3.0� <3.0� 150 �� 240 1000 �� 25 0.2 �� 10 0.14 �� <2.0� 150 �� �� <0.44� 530 <4.0� <1.0�

DW�108 10/19/2010 NA 150 <3.0� <3.0� 150 �� 220 980 �� 23 0.18 �� 9.8 0.13 �� <2.0� 150 �� �� <0.44� 520 <4.0� <1.0�

DW�108 12/14/2010 NA 130 <3.0� <3.0� 130 �� 240 1000 �� 24 0.34 �� 10 0.13 �� <2.0� 160 �� �� <0.44� 550 <4.0� <1.0�

DW�38C 05/19/2008 NA 190 <1.0� <1.0� 190 �� 30 550 0.11 23 <0.050� �� 12 0.22 �� <2.0� 83 �� �� 6.3 370 22 <1.0�

DW�38C 08/12/2010 NA 210 6.4 <3.0� 210 �� 41 600 <0.10� 27 <0.050� �� 13 0.36 �� <2.0� 81 83 �� 3.7 360 21 <1.0�

DW�38C 09/07/2010 NA 220 <3.0� <3.0� 220 �� 58 660 <0.10� 29 <0.050� �� 14 0.33 �� <2.0� 80 100 �� 3.1 380 26 <1.0�

DW�38D 05/19/2008 NA 170 <1.0� <1.0� 170 �� 25 490 0.11 16 <0.050� �� 9.5 0.31 �� <2.0� 81 �� �� 2.9 320 24 <1.0�

DW�38D 08/12/2010 NA 200 <3.0� <3.0� 200 �� 25 520 <0.10� 21 <0.050� �� 11 0.31 �� <2.0� 73 40 �� 3.3 320 23 <1.0�

DW�38D 09/07/2010 NA 200 <3.0� <3.0� 200 �� 27 520 <0.10� 20 <0.050� �� 11 0.45 �� <2.0� 72 50 �� 3.8 340 25 <1.0�

DW�53 05/06/1991 NA 220 �� �� �� �� 45 680 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 15 430 37 ��

DW�53 05/25/2005 NA 140 <1� <1� 140 �� 15 590 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 27 410 38 <1�

DW�53 05/20/2008 NA 410 <1.0� <1.0� 410 �� 140 1400 0.2 150 <0.050� �� 50 <0.010� �� 4.6 84 �� �� 21 870 49 <1.0�UJ�

DW�53 07/29/2009 NA 460 <1.0� <1.0� 460 �� 140 1400 �� 140 <0.050� �� 48 0.014 �� 4 88 �� �� 20 920 55 <1.0�

DW�53 12/13/2010 NA 410 <3.0� <3.0� 410 �� 160 �� �� 150 <0.050� �� 52 0.12 �� 6 100 �� �� 26 910 56 <1.0�UJ

DW�53 07/25/2011 NA 386 <5.0� �� 386 �� 135 �� �� 138 <0.20� �� 46.7 <0.015� �� <10� 72.7 �� �� 26.4 872 63.5 <0.20�

DW�54 05/17/2005 NA 100 <1� <1� 100 �� 30 280 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� <0.2� 170 <1� <1�

DW�54 05/14/2008 NA 93 <1.0� <1.0� 93 �� 33 290 <0.10� 5.3 0.052 �� 2.1 0.033 �� <2.0� 53 �� �� <0.20� 160 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�54 08/12/2010 NA 100 <3.0� <3.0� 110 �� 36 310 <0.10� 6.1 0.062 �� 2.4 0.04 �� <2.0� 56 57 �� <0.22� 180 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�54 09/07/2010 NA 110 <3.0� <3.0� 110 �� 39 290 <0.10� 5.6 0.054 �� 2.2 0.037 �� <2.0� 53 61 �� <0.22� 190 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�67 06/24/2004 NA 390 �� �� �� �� 91 1000 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 12 730 19 ��

DW�68 05/06/2005 NA 95 <1� <1� 95 �� 32 270 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� <0.2� 170 <1� <1�

DW�68 09/07/2010 NA 200 <3.0� <3.0� 200 �� 11 570 <0.10� 51 <0.050� �� 18 <0.010� �� 3.1 35 34 �� 17 400 24 <1.0�

DW�68 09/27/2010 NA 210 <3.0� <3.0� 210 �� 11 570 �� 53 <0.050� �� 19 <0.010� �� 3.3 36 �� �� 16 390 24 <1.0�

DW�68 10/19/2010 NA 210 <3.0� <3.0� 210 �� 11 570 �� 52 <0.050� �� 18 <0.010� �� 3.2 35 �� �� 17 400 24 <1.0�

DW�68 12/14/2010 NA 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 �� 11 570 �� 55 <0.050� �� 19 <0.010� �� 3.2 38 �� �� 15 410 26 <1.0�

DW�73 08/12/2010 NA 130 5.7 <3.0� 130 �� 88 530 <0.10� 13 0.14 �� 5 0.084 �� <2.0� 86 110 �� <0.22� 270 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�73 09/07/2010 NA 130 <3.0� <3.0� 130 �� 91 520 <0.10� 13 0.2 �� 4.9 0.084 �� <2.0� 84 120 �� 0.24 290 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�73 09/27/2010 NA 130 <3.0� <3.0� 130 �� 67 590 �� 29 0.11 �� 10 0.064 �� <2.0� 69 �� �� 15 370 15 <1.0�

DW�73 10/19/2010 NA 140 <3.0� <3.0� 140 �� 88 530 �� 13 0.18 �� 5.2 0.086 �� <2.0� 84 �� �� <0.22� 290 <2.0� <1.0�

DW�73 12/14/2010 NA 120 <3.0� <3.0� 120 �� 93 540 �� 14 0.31 �� 5.4 0.094 �� <2.0� 89 �� �� <0.22� 310 <2.0� <1.0�

HP�01 03/11/2008 173 170 3.2 <1.0� 170 �� 94 �� �� 19 <0.050� �� 7 0.071 �� 3.7 99 �� �� <0.40� 360 4.5 1.6

HP�01 03/12/2008 248 110 <1.0� <1.0� 110 �� 88 �� �� 10 <0.050� �� 3.6 0.045 �� 3.6 81 �� �� 0.27 290 14 3.2

Page�1�of�5

Page 32: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�3�1LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�ANALYTICAL�RESULTS�SUMMARY

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Sample�Location Sample�Date Depth A

lkal

inity

,�Bic

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

0 3�(m

g/L)

Alk

alin

ity,�C

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�H

ydro

xide

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�T

otal

�as�

CaC0

3�(m

g/L)

Brom

ide�

(mg/

L)

Chlo

ride

�(mg/

L)

Cond

uctiv

ity�

(um

hos/

cm)

Dis

solv

ed�B

oron

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�C

alci

um�

(mg/

L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

agne

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�P

otas

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�S

odiu

m�

(mg/

L)

Iodi

de�(u

g/L)

Nitr

ate�

(as�

NO

3)�

(mg/

L)

Nitr

ate�

Nitr

ogen

�(m

g/L)

Solid

s,�to

tal�d

isso

lved

�(m

g/L)

Sulfa

te�(m

g/L)

Tota

l�Kje

ldah

l�N

itrog

en�(m

g/L)

HP�02 02/22/2008 188 140 <1.0� <1.0� 140 �� 260 �� �� 32 <0.050� �� 14 0.11 �� 7.8 170 �� �� <0.40� 610 <4.0� <1.0�

HP�02 02/22/2008 233 170 8.7 <1.0� 180 �� 140 �� �� 21 <0.050� �� 8.8 0.1 �� 5.6 140 �� �� �� 460 26 <1.0�

HP�03 03/06/2008 190 120 <1.0� <1.0� 120 �� 460 �� �� 60 <0.050� �� 22 0.12 �� 5.2 250 �� �� <1.0� 1000 <10� <5.0�

HP�03 03/07/2008 230 110 <1.0� <1.0� 110 �� 210 �� �� 21 <0.050� �� 8.6 0.068 �� 3.4 150 �� �� 0.47 520 20 5.3

HP�04 03/24/2008 198 130 7 <1.0� 140 �� 380 �� �� 52 <0.050� �� 16 0.11 �� 6.6 240 �� �� <0.60� 830 25 1.2

HP�05 03/14/2008 228 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 530 �� �� 81 0.064 �� 30 0.5 �� 9.1 270 �� �� <1.0� 1200 <10� <1.0�

HP�06 03/04/2008 200 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 390 �� �� 57 0.081 �� 18 0.25 �� 6.6 220 �� �� <0.60� 840 <6.0� 1.8

HP�06 03/04/2008 239 140 8.4 <1.0� 150 �� 220 �� �� 23 <0.050� �� 10 0.15 �� 3.4 160 �� �� <0.40� 520 6.3 2.1

HP�07 03/18/2008 198 140 6.9 <1.0� 150 �� 220 �� �� 36 <0.050� �� 9.7 0.092 �� 5.2 190 �� �� <0.40� 680 63 1.2

HP�07 03/19/2008 236 52 28 <1.0� 80 �� 250 �� �� 26 <0.050� �� 6.9 <0.010� �� 6.9 220 �� �� <0.60� 710 130 <1.0�

IN�03 05/17/2005 NA 230 <1� <1� 230 �� 24 780 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� 27 550 33 <1�

IN�03 08/12/2010 NA 320 11 <3.0� 330 �� 40 940 <0.10� 88 <0.050� �� 29 <0.010� �� 4.6 66 58 �� 22 590 36 <1.0�

IN�03 09/07/2010 NA 140 <3.0� <3.0� 140 �� 64 480 <0.10� 20 <0.050� �� 7.4 0.076 �� 2.5 64 98 �� 2.1 290 4.6 <1.0�

IN�03 12/14/2010 NA 300 <3.0� <3.0� 300 �� 39 930 �� 90 <0.050� �� 29 <0.010� �� 4.4 64 �� �� 24 630 41 <1.0�

IN�05 05/19/2005 NA 120 <1� <1� 120 �� 70 440 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� <0.2� 250 <1� <1�

IN�07 05/05/2005 NA 160 <1� <1� 160 �� 240 1000 �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� �� <0.2� 620 <1� <1�

IN�07 05/20/2008 NA 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 300 1200 0.16 55 <0.050� �� 21 0.12 �� 5.8 170 �� �� <0.60� 760 <6.0� <1.0�UJ�

IN�07 08/12/2010 NA 170 <3.0� <3.0� 170 �� 320 1300 <0.10� 57 <0.050� �� 20 0.17 �� 5.4 160 390 �� <0.44� 780 <4.0� <1.0�

IN�07 09/07/2010 NA 170 <3.0� <3.0� 170 �� 320 1300 0.1 54 <0.050� �� 19 0.17 �� 5.1 160 410 �� <0.66� 740 <6.0� <1.0�

MW�23 03/13/2008 NA <3.0� 220 52 380 �� 250 2200 <0.10� 2.7 <0.050� �� 0.83 �� �� 150 260 �� �� <2.0� 960 22 <1.0�

MW�23 08/04/2008 NA <10� 210 230 440 �� 150 2310 <0.10�Jo 5 <0.050� �� 0.3 <0.010� �� 140 250 �� �� �� 970 7.5 0.55

MW�23 09/08/2008 NA 150 <2.5� <2.5� 150 �� 280 1190 <0.10�Jo 30 <0.050� �� 13 0.2 �� 8.9 190 �� �� �� 680 1.6 <0.20�Jo

MW�23 10/09/2008 NA 150 <2.5� <2.5� 150 �� 280 1190 <0.10�Jo 27 <0.050�Jo �� 12 0.19 �� 7.7 170 �� �� �� 680 1.9 <0.20�Jo

MW�23 11/04/2008 NA 150 <2.5� <2.5� 150 �� 280 1160 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050�Jo �� 14 0.23 �� 7.2 180 �� �� �� 620 1.3 <0.20�Jo

MW�23 12/03/2008 NA 160 <5.0� <5.0� 160 �� 290 1160 <0.10�Jo 30 <0.050� �� 13 0.2 �� 7.2 180 �� �� �� 670 2.1 <0.20�

MW�23 01/13/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 280 1140 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050�Jo �� 14 0.23 �� 6 180 �� �� �� 640 2 <0.20�

MW�23 02/04/2009 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 280 1120 <0.10�Jo 32 <0.050� �� 14 0.21 �� 5.3 190 �� �� �� 620 1.8 <0.20�

MW�23 03/04/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 290 1150 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050�Jo �� 14 0.19 �� 4.8 170 �� �� �� 640 1.9 <0.20�

MW�23 04/14/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 270 1100 <0.10�Jo 33 <0.050� �� 15 0.23 �� 6 190 �� �� �� 640 1.4 <0.20�

MW�23 05/04/2009 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 270 1130 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050� �� 14 0.19 �� 4.7 180 �� �� �� 680 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 06/09/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 300 1090 <0.1�Jo 32 <0.05� �� 14 0.2 �� 3.9 170 �� �� �� 650 1.4 <0.2�

MW�23 07/14/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 290 1130 <0.10�Jo 33 <0.050�Jo �� 15 0.21 �� 4.4 180 �� �� �� 680 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 08/04/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 290 1130 <0.1�Jo 33 <0.05� �� 15 0.2 �� 3.6 170 �� �� �� 640 <1�Jo <0.2�

MW�23 09/08/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 290 1130 <0.10�Jo 32 <0.050� �� 15 0.19 �� 4 170 �� �� �� 630 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 10/07/2009 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 290 1110 <0.10�Jo 33 <0.050� �� 15 0.22 �� 3.5 170 �� �� �� 660 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

Page�2�of�5

Page 33: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�3�1LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�ANALYTICAL�RESULTS�SUMMARY

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Sample�Location Sample�Date Depth A

lkal

inity

,�Bic

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

0 3�(m

g/L)

Alk

alin

ity,�C

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�H

ydro

xide

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�T

otal

�as�

CaC0

3�(m

g/L)

Brom

ide�

(mg/

L)

Chlo

ride

�(mg/

L)

Cond

uctiv

ity�

(um

hos/

cm)

Dis

solv

ed�B

oron

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�C

alci

um�

(mg/

L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

agne

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�P

otas

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�S

odiu

m�

(mg/

L)

Iodi

de�(u

g/L)

Nitr

ate�

(as�

NO

3)�

(mg/

L)

Nitr

ate�

Nitr

ogen

�(m

g/L)

Solid

s,�to

tal�d

isso

lved

�(m

g/L)

Sulfa

te�(m

g/L)

Tota

l�Kje

ldah

l�N

itrog

en�(m

g/L)

MW�23 11/10/2009 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 280 1140 <0.10�Jo 32 <0.050�Jo �� 15 0.21 �� 4.2 170 �� �� �� 640 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 12/08/2009 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 290 1100 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050� �� 14 0.21 �� 3.8 170 �� �� �� 660 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 01/05/2010 NA 140 <4.1� <4.1� 140 �� 280 1140 <0.10�Jo 31 <0.050� �� 14 0.2 �� 4 170 �� �� �� 660 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 02/10/2010 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 18 �� 280 1160 <0.10�Jo 32 <0.050�Jo �� 15 0.2 �� 4 170 �� �� �� 700 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 03/08/2010 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 280 1130 <0.10�Jo 32 <0.050�Jo �� 15 0.22 �� 4 170 �� �� �� 660 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 04/15/2010 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 300 1130 �� 33 �� 220 15 �� 200 3.9 180 �� �� �� 680 <1.0� <0.20�

MW�23 07/08/2010 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 290 1170 �� 30 �� <50�Jo 14 �� 190 3.6 170 �� �� �� 640 <1.0�Jo <1.0�

MW�23 10/28/2010 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 300 1150 �� 34 �� <50�Jo 16 �� 230 3.8 190 �� �� �� 710 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 01/19/2011 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 280 1130 �� 30 �� <50� 14 �� 190 3.6 160 �� �� �� 740 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 04/04/2011 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 270 1150 �� 33 �� <50�Jo 16 �� 210 4 180 �� �� �� 640 <1.0�Jo <0.40�

MW�23 07/07/2011 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 280 1140 �� 32 �� <50� 15 �� 240 3.4 180 �� �� <0.10� 620 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 10/04/2011 NA 160 <8.2� �� 160 �� 290 1160 �� 33 �� <50� 15 �� 210 3.4 170 �� �� <0.10� 660 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 01/18/2012 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 280 1180 �� 33 �� <50�Jo 15 �� 210 3.5 190 �� �� <0.10� 680 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�23 04/04/2012 NA 140 <8.2� �� 140 �� 280 1110 �� 32 �� <50�Jo 14 �� 200 3.2 160 �� �� <0.10� 680 <1.0�Jo <0.20�

MW�26 01/06/2010 NA 140 �� �� 140 �� 510 1760 �� 58 <0.050� �� 25 0.47 �� 4.1 280 �� �� 0.11 1100 59 <0.20�

MW�26 04/15/2010 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 380 1430 �� 38 0.1 �� 16 0.5 �� 3.5 250 �� �� <0.10� 940 20 <0.20�

MW�26 08/12/2010 NA 150 <8.2� <8.2� 150 �� 390 1420 0.11 40 <0.050� �� 17 0.49 �� 3.4 230 380 �� <0.10� 830 5.5 <0.20�

MW�26 10/28/2010 NA 160 <8.2� �� 160 �� 370 1400 �� 38 <0.050� �� 16 0.46 �� 2.9 220 �� �� <0.10� 850 5.9 <0.20�

MW�26 05/18/2011 NA 148 �� �� 148 1.5 342 1630 �� 52.5 0.261 �� 21.7 0.662 �� <10� 230 460 �� <0.10� 832 2.5 <0.20�

MW�26 07/07/2011 NA 146�U �� �� 146�U 1.5 377 1610 �� 46.7 0.242 �� 19.5 0.614 �� <10� 210 390 �� <0.10� 901 2.3�U <0.20�

MW�26 10/05/2011 NA 188 <5.0� �� 188 0.94 243 1190 �� 37.7 <0.20� �� 14.9 0.499 �� <10� 192 250 �� 0.42�U 652 9.7 <0.20�

MW�26 01/05/2012 NA 173 <5.0� �� 173 1.1 300 1280 �� 41.7 <0.20� �� 16.7 0.603 �� <10� 183 330 <0.45� <0.1� 671 9.4�U <0.20�

MW�26 04/04/2012 NA 160 <5.0� �� 160 1.2 313 1490 �� 52.4 0.232 �� 19.8 0.745 �� <10� 235 430 �� <0.50� 811 5 0.49

MW�27 01/06/2010 NA 130 �� �� 130 �� 570 1810 �� 66 <0.050� �� 24 0.37 �� 5.2 260 �� �� <0.10� 1100 2.6 <0.20�

MW�27 04/15/2010 NA 130 <8.2� <8.2� 130 �� 590 1810 �� 70 0.13 �� 25 0.41 �� 5.5 280 �� �� <0.10� 1200 2.7 <0.20�

MW�27 08/12/2010 NA 130 <8.2� <8.2� 130 �� 570 1870 0.11 69 <0.050� �� 25 0.56 �� 5.4 230 550 �� <0.10� 1300�J� 3.6 <0.20�

MW�27 10/28/2010 NA 130 <8.2� �� 130 �� 550 1900 �� 67 <0.050� �� 24 0.53 �� 4.8 290 �� �� <0.10� 1300 1.7 <0.20�

MW�27 05/18/2011 NA 134 �� �� 134 2 474 2010 �� 67.8 0.366 �� 23.5 0.579 �� <10� 248 600 �� <0.10� 1080 1 <0.20�

MW�27 07/07/2011 NA 138�U �� �� 138�U 2 510 1950 �� 65.9 0.367 �� 23.1 0.611 �� <10� 242 500 �� <0.10� 1180 0.82�U <0.20�

MW�27 10/05/2011 NA 136 <5.0� �� 136 2 466 1890 �� 69.1 0.346 �� 24 0.634 �� <10� 260 540 �� <0.10� 1110 1.8 0.26

MW�27 01/04/2012 NA 131 <5.0� �� 131 2.1 540 1900 �� 68.5 0.381 �� 24 0.644 �� <10� 254 580 <0.45�UJ <0.1�UJ 1080 2.4�U <0.20�

MW�27 04/04/2012 NA 136 <5.0� �� 136 <2.0� 491 1830 �� 74.2 0.357 �� 24.6 0.63 �� <10� 276 560 �� <1.0� 1110 <5.0� 0.46

MW�28 01/07/2010 NA 140 �� �� 140 �� 500 1700 �� 70�J� <0.050�UJ� �� 18�J� 0.21�J� �� 5.7�J� 260�J� �� �� 0.21 1100 8.1 <0.20�

MW�28 04/15/2010 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 510 1670 �� 70 <0.050� �� 17 0.33 �� 5.7 250 �� �� <0.10� 1100 4.4 <0.20�

MW�28 08/12/2010 NA 140 <8.2� <8.2� 140 �� 510 1700 0.11 68 <0.050� �� 17 0.41 �� 6.3 240 510 �� <0.10� 1100 2.4 <0.20�

Page�3�of�5

Page 34: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�3�1LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�ANALYTICAL�RESULTS�SUMMARY

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Sample�Location Sample�Date Depth A

lkal

inity

,�Bic

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

0 3�(m

g/L)

Alk

alin

ity,�C

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�H

ydro

xide

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�T

otal

�as�

CaC0

3�(m

g/L)

Brom

ide�

(mg/

L)

Chlo

ride

�(mg/

L)

Cond

uctiv

ity�

(um

hos/

cm)

Dis

solv

ed�B

oron

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�C

alci

um�

(mg/

L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

agne

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�P

otas

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�S

odiu

m�

(mg/

L)

Iodi

de�(u

g/L)

Nitr

ate�

(as�

NO

3)�

(mg/

L)

Nitr

ate�

Nitr

ogen

�(m

g/L)

Solid

s,�to

tal�d

isso

lved

�(m

g/L)

Sulfa

te�(m

g/L)

Tota

l�Kje

ldah

l�N

itrog

en�(m

g/L)

MW�28 11/08/2010 NA 150 <8.2� �� 150 �� 500 1730 �� 68 <0.050� �� 17 0.58 �� 5.7 260 �� �� <0.10� 1100 1 <0.20�

MW�28 05/17/2011 NA 134 �� �� 134 1.7 392 1800 �� 55 <0.20� �� 16.1 0.799 �� 15.2 222 530 �� <0.10� 924 3.6 <0.20�

MW�28 07/07/2011 NA 88.0�U �� �� 88.0�U 1.7 492 1780 �� 68.1 0.355 �� 17 0.83 �� <10� 218 430 �� <0.10� 1040 0.65�U <0.20�

MW�28 10/05/2011 NA 143 <5.0� �� 143 1.9 412 1670 �� 70.3 0.367 �� 17.4 0.908 �� <10� 244 440 �� 0.20�U 1020 1.1 <0.20�

MW�28 01/04/2012 NA 154 <5.0� �� 154 1.9 460�J 1700 �� 72.2 0.416 �� 17.9 0.865 �� <10� 230 490 <0.45� <0.1� 987 1.7�U <0.20�

MW�28 04/04/2012 NA 142 <5.0� �� 142 <2.0� 456 1710 �� 78.8 0.449 �� 18.1 0.923 �� <10� 258 570 �� <1.0� 1020 <5.0� 0.35

MW�38 10/28/2010 303 240 <3.0� <3.0� 240 �� 550 2300 �� 84 <0.050� �� 38 1.8 �� 6 280 �� �� <1.1� 1200 12 2.6

MW�38 10/28/2010 350 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 �� 630 2300 �� 83 0.41 �� 23 0.39 �� 12 340 �� �� <2.2�R 1300 42 12

MW�38 12/14/2010 NA 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 �� 530 2000 �� 68 3.7 �� 34 1.2 �� 3.2 260 �� �� <1.1� 1100 <10� <1.0�

MW�38 01/26/2011 NA 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 2.1 520 2000 0.12 71 3.8 �� 36 1.3 �� 3.6 270 570 �� <1.1� 1100 <10� <1.0�

MW�38 05/17/2011 NA 196 �� �� 196 2.7 660 2700 �� 129 0.389 �� 34.1 0.551 �� <10� 290 870 �� <0.10� 1470 <0.50� <0.20�

MW�38 07/07/2011 NA 212�U �� �� 212�U 2.1 564 2040 �� 96.3 0.524 �� 27.8 0.524 �� <10� 272 570 �� <0.10� 1210 <0.50� <0.20�

MW�38 10/05/2011 NA 208 <5.0� �� 208 1.9 442 1980 �� 77.4 2.35 �� 33.8 1.01 �� <10� 262 490 �� <0.10� 1140 <0.50� <0.20�

MW�38 01/04/2012 NA 204 <5.0� �� 204 2.1 530�J 1970 �� 80.4 3.54 �� 37.4 1.19 �� <10� 258 590 <0.45� <0.1� 1150 1.2�U <0.20�

MW�38 04/04/2012 NA 202 <5.0� �� 202 <2.0� 502 1970 �� 73.2 3.41 �� 34.4 1.15 �� <10� 243 580 �� <1.0� 1140 <5.0� 0.51

MW�40 11/04/2010 260 120 <3.0� <3.0� 120 �� 400 1600 �� 44 <0.050� �� 13 0.025 �� 15 250 �� �� <0.66� 980 43 7.2

MW�40 11/05/2010 305 200 <3.0� <3.0� 200 �� 510 2000 �� 81 <0.050� �� 28 0.25 �� 9.9 270 �� �� <1.1� 1100 <10� 2.9

MW�40 12/14/2010 NA 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 �� 370 1600 �� 56 1.1 �� 18 0.76 �� 3.8 210 �� �� <1.1� 850 <10� <1.0�

MW�40 01/26/2011 NA 190 <3.0� <3.0� 190 1.6 360 1600 0.13 59 1.1 �� 19 0.8 �� 3.9 220 400 �� <1.1� 850 <10� <1.0�

MW�40 05/17/2011 NA 204 �� �� 204 1.7 402 1890 �� 73 0.375 �� 23.1 0.611 �� <10� 227 540 �� <0.10� 979 1.1 <0.20�

MW�40 07/07/2011 NA 206�U �� �� 206�U 1.8 477 1980 �� 79 0.366 �� 25 0.68 �� <10� 236 480 �� <0.10� 1100 1.3�U <0.20�

MW�40 10/05/2011 NA 204 <5.0� �� 204 1.6 366 1740 �� 71.6 0.347 �� 21.9 0.575 �� <10� 244 430 �� <0.10� 1010 1.4 <0.20�

MW�40 01/04/2012 NA 196 <5.0� �� 196 1.5 390�J 1560 �� 67.5 0.492 �� 20.9 0.639 �� <10� 214 440 <0.45� <0.1� 876 1�U <0.20�

MW�40 04/04/2012 NA 210 <5.0� �� 210 <2.0� 435 1890 �� 90 0.594 �� 25.4 0.71 �� <10� 278 560 �� <1.0� 1070 <5.0� 0.39

SB�03 10/30/2009 196.25 160 <1.0� <1.0� 160 �� 370 1500 �� 43 <0.050� �� 18 0.21 �� 6.3 220 �� �� <0.60� 820 11 2.8

SB�03 10/30/2009 229.5 150 5.2 <1.0� 150 �� 380 1500 �� 41 0.13 �� 19 0.41 �� 3.8 210 �� �� <0.60�J� 820 6.6 <1.0�

SB�05 11/04/2009 174.5 320 <1.0� <1.0� 320 �� 51 1200 �� 100 0.16 �� 35 0.21 �� 13 72 �� �� 45 700 44 3.9

SB�05 11/06/2009 182.75 310 <1.0� <1.0� 310 �� 54 1200 �� 110 0.16 �� 36 0.17 �� 14 68 �� �� 45 750 46 1.5

SB�06 11/11/2009 190.5 120 <1.0� <1.0� 120 �� 540 1800 �� 70 <0.050� �� 28 0.25 �� 5.2 280 �� �� <1.0� 1000 <10� <1.0�

SB�06 11/12/2009 233 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 270 1100 �� 28 <0.050� �� 13 0.098 �� 3.1 190 �� �� <0.40� 580 <4.0� <1.0�

SB�07 11/19/2009 189.5 130 <1.0� <1.0� 130 �� 650 2000 �� 69 0.38 �� 24 0.34 �� 5 260 �� �� 0.36 1200 <2.0� <1.0�

SB�08 11/24/2009 195.75 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 470 1800 �� 72 <0.050� �� 17 0.24 �� 6.4 250 �� �� <1.0� 1000 <10� <1.0�

SB�08 11/25/2009 230.5 160 <1.0� <1.0� 160 �� 520 2000 �� 74 <0.050� �� 27 0.51 �� 7.2 260 �� �� <1.0� 1000 <10� <1.0�

SB�09 12/07/2009 198 150 <1.0� <1.0� 150 �� 660 2000 �� 84 <0.050� �� 20 0.33 �� 9.2 290 �� �� <1.0� 1100 <10� <1.0�

Page�4�of�5

Page 35: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

TABLE�3�1LOWER�AQUIFER�GROUNDWATER�ANALYTICAL�RESULTS�SUMMARY

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

Sample�Location Sample�Date Depth A

lkal

inity

,�Bic

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

0 3�(m

g/L)

Alk

alin

ity,�C

arbo

nate

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�H

ydro

xide

�as

�CaC

O3�(

mg/

L)

Alk

alin

ity,�T

otal

�as�

CaC0

3�(m

g/L)

Brom

ide�

(mg/

L)

Chlo

ride

�(mg/

L)

Cond

uctiv

ity�

(um

hos/

cm)

Dis

solv

ed�B

oron

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�C

alci

um�

(mg/

L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�Ir

on�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

agne

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�M

anga

nese

�(u

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�P

otas

sium

�(m

g/L)

Dis

solv

ed�S

odiu

m�

(mg/

L)

Iodi

de�(u

g/L)

Nitr

ate�

(as�

NO

3)�

(mg/

L)

Nitr

ate�

Nitr

ogen

�(m

g/L)

Solid

s,�to

tal�d

isso

lved

�(m

g/L)

Sulfa

te�(m

g/L)

Tota

l�Kje

ldah

l�N

itrog

en�(m

g/L)

SB�10 01/26/2012 174.5 174 <5.0� �� 174 1.1 327 �� 0.105 39.6 �� �� 14.2 0.827 �� <10� 193 390 �� <0.10� 732 26.4 ��

SB�10 01/27/2012 216.5 531 <5.0� �� 531 0.32 170 �� 0.124 120 �� �� 45.6 0.834 �� <10� 152 110 �� <0.10� 432 37.6 ��

SB�12 02/01/2012 183 191 <5.0� �� 191 <1.0� 140 �� <0.10� 16 �� �� 7.29 0.218 �� <10� 126 160 �� <0.50� 375 <2.5� ��

SB�12 02/01/2012 230.5 586 <5.0� �� 586 0.24 108 �� <0.10� 23 �� �� 9.36 0.104 �� <10� 135 69 �� <0.10� 555 22.2 ��

Notes:

ft�bgs�=�feet�below�ground�surface

mg/L�=�milligrams�per�liter

NA�=�not�applicable

ug/L�=�micrograms�per�liter

umhos/cm�=�micromhos�per�centimeter

���=�not�analyzedDetections�are�bolded.

See�Table�3�2�for�data�qualifier�definitions.

Page�5�of�5

Page 36: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Page�1�of�1

TABLE�3�2�DATA�QUALIFIER�DEFINITIONS�

Hilmar�Cheese�Company�Hilmar,�California�

��U� The� analyte� was� detected� above� the� laboratory� reported� sample� quantitation� limit.��

However,� due� to� contamination� from� an� outside� source� such� as� laboratory� or� field�equipment,� the� analyte� should� be� considered� not� detected� at� or� above� the� adjusted�sample�quantitation�limit.��

J� The� analyte� was� positively� identified� but� the� associated� numerical� value� may� not�represent�the�actual�concentration�of�the�analyte�in�the�sample�due�to�analytical�bias�in�precision� or� accuracy,� or� because� the� resulting� concentration� has� been� reported� at� a�confidence�level�less�than�99%.�

Jo� A�subset�of�the�“J”�flag�described�above.� �The�analyte�was�positively�identified�but�the�associated� estimated� numerical� value� reported� by� the� laboratory� was� less� than� the�sample�specific� reporting� limit� for� this� analyte.� � Consequently,� there� is� a� lower�confidence�in�the�accuracy�in�the�result.�

UJ� The�analyte�was�not�detected�above�the�reported�sample�quantitation�limit.��However,�the�reported�quantitation�limit�is�approximate�and�may�or�may�not�represent�the�actual�limit� of� quantitation� necessary� to� accurately� and� precisely� measure� the� analyte� in� the�sample.�

R� The�sample�results�are�rejected�due�to�serious�deficiencies�in�the�ability�to�analyze�the�sample� and� meet� quality� control� criteria.� � The� presence� or� absence� of� the� analyte�cannot�be�verified.�

+� The�result�is�biased�high.�

�� The�result�is�biased�low.�

ft�bgs� feet�below�ground�surface�

mg/L� milligrams�per�liter�

NA� not�analyzed�or�not�applicable�

ug/L� micrograms�per�liter�

umhos/cm� micromhos�per�centimeter�

Page 37: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

��

FIGURES

Page 38: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

��

LIST�OF�FIGURES�

Figure�1�1� Site�Location�Map�

Figure�2�1� Site�Plan�

Figure�2�2� Regional�Land�Use�

Figure�2�3� Site�and�Vicinity�Land�Use�

Figure�2�4� Wastewater�and�Former�Primary�Land�Use�Timeline�

Figure�2�5� Physiographic�Setting�

Figure�2�6� Map�of�Geologic�Units�and�Corcoran�Clay�Extent�

Figure�2�7� San�Joaquin�Valley�Groundwater�Basin�

Figure�2�8� Regional�Well�Locations�

Figure�2�9� Supply�Well�Locations�

Figure�4�1a� Cross�Section�A�A’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1b� Cross�Section�B�B’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1c� Cross�Section�C�C’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�1d� Cross�Section�D�D’,�Vertical�Extent�of�Chloride�

Figure�4�2� B�Aquitard�Isopach�

Figure�4�3a� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2010)�

Figure�4�3b� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2011)�

Figure�4�3c� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(January�2012)�

Figure�4�4a� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(April�2010)�

Figure�4�4b� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(July�2011)�

Figure�4�4c� Lower�Aquifer�Potentiometric�Surface�Map�(April�2012)�

Figure�4�5a� Upper�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Charts�

Figure�4�5b� Upper�to�Lower�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Charts�

Figure�4�5c� Lower�Aquifer�Vertical�Gradient�Chart�

Page 39: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LOWER AQUIFER REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SUMMARY REPORT Hilmar Cheese Company – August 20, 2012

��

LIST�OF�FIGURES�

Figure�4�6� Lower�Aquifer�Age�Dating�Monitoring�Well�Locations�

Figure�4�7� Lower�Aquifer�Tri�Linear�Diagram�

Figure�4�8� Stiff�Diagrams�Upper�and�Lower�Aquifers�(2010�Averaged�Data)�

Figure�4�9a� Iodide�vs.�Chloride�

Figure�4�9b� Iodide�vs.�Sodium�

Figure�4�10a� Lower�Aquifer�Iodide�and�Chloride�Concentrations�

Figure�4�10b� Upper�Aquifer�Iodide�and�Chloride�Concentrations�

Figure�4�11� Estimated�Area�of�Elevated�Regional�TDS�Levels�

Figure�4�12� Total�Dissolved�Solids�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)��

Figure�4�13� Chloride�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)�

Figure�4�14� Sodium�in�Groundwater�Samples�(Lower�Aquifer)�

Figure�4�15� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�23�

Figure�4�16� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�26�

Figure�4�17� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�27�

Figure�4�18� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�28�

Figure�4�29� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�38�

Figure�4�20� Analytical�and�Groundwater�Elevation�Data�for�MW�40�

Figure�4�21� IN�1�Vicinity�Grab�Groundwater�Data�

Page 40: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 41: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

&>

&>

&>

&>&> &>

&>

&> &> &>

&>

!!

!

!!

!

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

&>&>

&>

&>

&>

&>

& >

&>

&>

& >

&>

& >

& >

!

!

!

&>

&>

&> &>

&>

B

B

&>

&>

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&< &<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<©̈©©

&<

&<©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©&<

B

&(&(&(

&(&(&(

©̈©©©̈©©

&<

&<

&<

&<

IN-02

G5B

G7A

G6A

G5A

G7B

G6B

REVERSEOSMOSIS

PONDS

STORM WATERRETENTION POND

FORMER HOLDING/RETENTIONPOND

LATERAL NO. 6

LATE

RA

L N

o. 7

MW-37

MW-36

MW-35

MW-34

MW 31

MW-40

MW-38

PZ-07PZ-06

PZ-05

PZ-04

PZ-03

OBS-1

MW-29

MW-28MW-27

MW-26MW-25

MW-24

MW-23MW-22

MW-21

MW-20

MW-19

MW-18

MW-16 MW-15

MW-14

MW-13

MW-12

MW-11

MW-10

MW-09

MW-08

MW-07

MW-05MW-04

MW-03MW-02

MW-01

AW-04AW-03

AW-02

AW-01

PZ-02

MW-17

MW-06

SB-09

SB-08

SB-07

SB-06

SB-05

SB-04

SB-03

SB-01

HP-07

HP-06

HP-05 HP-04HP-03

HP-01

AB-10

AB-09AB-08AB-07

AB-06

AB-05

AB-04

AB-03

AB-02

AB-01

CPT-11

CPT-10

CPT-06

CPT-05

CPT-03

CPT-02

CPT-01

AB-05a

BG-WEST

Check G2

Check 05

Check 01

Check G5

Check 38Check 23

Check 17

CPT-04-NA

CPT-01-NA

CPT-03-NA

CPT-02-NA

CPT-05-NA

SB-02

HP-02CPT-09

CPT-08

BG-EAST

IN-01

AUGUST AVENUE

JOHNSON AVENUE

AMERICAN AVENUE

LAN

DE

R A

VE

NU

E

TEG

NE

R A

VE

NU

E

CO

LUM

BU

S A

VE

NU

E

OSLO ROAD

OS

LO S

TRE

ET

S-1

S-3

S-6

S-29S-30

S-11

S-33 S-31 S-35

S-27

S-25

S-5

S-7

S-4

S-2

S-24

S-40

S-20

S-21

S-22

S-34

S-26

S-13

S-2

S-41

S-8

S-24

S-23

S-9

£0 1,000

SCALE IN FEET

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATIONFIGURE 2-1

SITE PLAN07/31/12 SMRAL

LEGEND

CURRENT SECONDARY LAND AREA

NOTE: CPT1-NA THROUGH CPT5-NA LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

S-2

CURRENT PRIMARY LAND CHECK AS OF DECEMBER 20102

HCC FACILITY

SOIL AND GRAB GROUNDWATER BORING& >

GRAB GROUNDWATER BORING

&>! SOIL BORING

B DESTROYED WELL

&( PIEZOMETER

&< UPPER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL

©̈©© LOWER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL

C:\G

IS\H

ilmar

\Rep

orts

\Lw

rAqE

xt\F

ig 2

-4 S

ite P

lan.

mxd

&> &>

&>

!

&>

B

B

&>

&> &<

&<

&<

&<

MW-04

MW-03MW-02

A

CPT-10

01

CPT-01-NA

SB-12

SB-10

AUGUST AVENUE

IN-01

IN-02

SB-10

SB-12

Page 42: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Merc

ed River

San JoaquinRiver

Turlock

Livingston

Hilmar

STANISLAUS COUNTY

MERCED COUNTY

Atwater

1 0 1 2 30.5

SCALE IN MILES

£

LAND USE CLASSIFICATION

LEGENDSITE BOUNDARY

AGRICULTURAL LAND

NATIVE CLASSES

NOT SURVEYED

PASTURE

URBAN

WATER

NON-IRRIGATEDAGRICULTURAL LAND

SOURCE: 2002 MERCED COUNTY AND 2004 STANISLAUS COUNTY LAND USE SURVEY DATA; CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES.

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 2-2

REGIONAL LAND USE6/17/10 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\LwrAqExt\Fig 2-1 LandUseClassifications.mxd

Page 43: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 44: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Sand�FiltersNOT�USED

EGSBIN�SERVICE

Enclosed�FlareIN�SERVICESpill�TankIN SERVICE

Surge�TankIN�SERVICESubmerged�

HollowFiber�UF

IN�SERVICEReplacement�

RO Units

Deep�Well�Injection

(RO�concentrate)IN�SERVICE

Granule�Catcher

IN�SERVICE

PCDAFIN�SERVICE

WASTEWATERQUALITY

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�Ye

arly

�Ave

rage

�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lite

r)

WASTEWATERTREATMENT

VSEP(NF�

Membranes)REMOVED

EqualizationIN�SERVICE

VSEP(RO�

Membranes)REMOVED

VSEP(UF�

Membranes)REMOVEDRO�Unit�#1IN�SERVICE

PondsIN SERVICE

VSEP(UF�

Membranes)REMOVED

RO�Units�#2�&�#3

REPLACED�IN�2005

Filter�PressNOT�USED

3567

25752867 2762 2754

33743009

6333

45964885 4836

2074 2248 2100 2217 21111527

NO�DATA

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

IN�SERVICEPre�AerationIN�SERVICE

SBRIN�SERVICE

RO�Units#2�&�#3

IN�SERVICE

TREATMENTSTATUS

DISCHARGEHISTORY

Was

tew

ater

�Dis

char

ge�Y

early

�Ave

rage

�(m

illio

n�ga

llons

�per

�day

)

NO�TREATMENT IN�SERVICE 2005EvaporatorIN�SERVICE

Wastewater�to�Primary�Areas�(mgd)

Wastewater�to�RO�Ponds�(mgd)

Total�Wastewater�Discharge�(mgd)

NO�DATA2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.01977 1985 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Tile�drain�

plugged�(in�area�H);�application�

to�area�H�began.

RO�permeate�application�to�

secondary�lands�began;�

reduction�in�wastewater�

application�to�Primary�Lands.

PRIMARY�LANDAPPLICATION

HISTORY

Wastewater�application�to�areas�F�and�G�

began�in�December.

Application�to�area�E�began,��

Increase�in�facility�

operations.

Removed�16�acres�of�Primary�Lands�(area�B).

Store�RO�permeate�to�2�

clay�lined�ponds�(RO�ponds).

Tile�drain�plugged�(area�

A).Removed�6�

acres�of�Primary�Lands�(part�of�

area�H).

Removed�10�acres�of�Primary�Lands�(area�H).

Wickstrom�tile�drain�plugged�

(area�C).

Removed�52�acres�of�Primary�

Lands(areas�E,�F,�G).

Application�to�area�C�and�H�from�January�

through�March.��Application�to�

area�H�in�August.�

Application�to�area�C�in�

November�and�December.

TID�tile�drain�operation�in�HCC�vicinity.

Facility�operations�

began.��Discharge�to�

holding/�percolation�

pond.

Wastewater�application�began�to�29�

acres�of�Primary�Lands�(areas�A�and�B).��First�WDR�issued.

Wastewater�application�to�areas�A�and�B�

gradually�increasing.

Wastewater�application�

shifted�to�area�C�and�smaller�

amounts�applied�to�areas�

A�and�B.��Wastewater�

application�to�area�D�began�in�

December.

0.2

0.0

0.2

0.0

C D

EF

G

LAN

DER

�AV

E

C D LAN

DER

�AV

E

LAN

DER

�AV

E

LAN

DER

�AV

E

HOLDING/PERCOLATION C D

EF

G

LAN

DER

�AV

E

C D

EF

G

LAN

DER

�AV

E

H

C D

EF

GH

LAN

DER

�AV

E

C D

EF

G

H

LAN

DER

�AV

E

C D

H

LAN

DER

�AV

E

C

H

LAN

DER

�AV

E

EGSB�=�expanded�granular�sludge�bedHCC�=�Hilmar�Cheese�Companymgd�=�million�gallons�per�dayNF�=�nanofiltrationPCDAF�=�physico�chemical�dissolved�air�flotation

RO�=�reverse�osmosisSBR�=�sequencing�bath�reactorTID�=�Turlock�Irrigation�DistrictUF�=�ultrafiltration

VSEP�=�vibratory�sheer�enhancement�processWDR�=�Waste�Discharge�Requirement

Notes:(1)�Excludes�Secondary�Land�application�which�began�receiving�treated�wastewater�in�2001.(2)�Wastewater�and�Primary�Land�history�is�based�on�the�Report�of�Waste�Discharge�(August�2004)�and�the�Groundwater�Characterization�Report�(September�2004)�by�Brown�and�Caldwell;�Monthly�Water�Quality�Monitoring�Reports�by�HCC;�and�the�Report�of�Waste�Discharge�(June�2008)�by�KennedyJenks.

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2-4

WASTEWATER AND FORMER PRIMARY LANDUSE TIMELINE3/15/11 SM JJ

LOCATION

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

CA B

D

EF

G

1996 � 1998

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

CA B

D

1995

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

A B

1989�1994

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

1985�1989

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

HOLDING/PERCOLATION

POND

CA

D

EF

G

1999 � 2000

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

CA

D

EF

G

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

2000�� 2003

H

AC D

EF

GH

2003�� 2006

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

AC D

EF

G

H

2006�� 2009

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

AC D

H

2009

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

C

H

2010

LAN

DER

�AV

E

AUGUST�AVE

Page 45: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Merced River

San Joaquin River

Turlock

Livingston

Hilmar

STANISLAUS COUNTY

MERCED COUNTY

Atwater

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 2-5

PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING6/17/10 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

1 0 1 2 30.5

SCALE IN MILES

£

SOURCE: USGS SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 2004-5232(HYDROGEOLOGIC CHARACTERIZATION OF THE MODESTO AREA,SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, CA) (MODIFIED FROM CALIFORNIADIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, 1966).

PHYSIOGRAPHY

DATA UNAVAILABLE

CONSOLIDATED ROCKS AND DEPOSITS

LOW ALLUVIAL PLAINS AND FANS

RIVER FLOODPLAINS, CHANNELS, & OVERFLOW LANDS

BOUNDARY OF CORCORAN CLAY

SITE BOUNDARY

WATER

LEGEND

Path: C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012RI_Summary\Fig 2-5 PhysiographicSetting.mxd

Page 46: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Merced River

San Joaquin River

Turlock

Livingston

Hilmar

STANISLAUS COUNTY

MERCED COUNTY

Atwater

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 2-6

MAP OF GEOLOGIC UNITS ANDCORCORAN CLAY EXTENT6/17/10 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

1 0 1 2 30.5

SCALE IN MILES

£

SOURCE: USGS SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONSREPORT 2004-5232 (HYDROGEOLOGICCHARACTERIZATION OF THE MODESTO AREA, SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, CA) (MODIFIED FROM CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY, 1966).

LEGEND

GEOLOGIC UNIT

DUNES

ALLUVIUM AND DREDGE TAILINGS

STREAM CHANNEL DEPOSITS

FLOOD-BASIN DEPOSITS

NONMARINE TERRACE DEPOSITS

MODESTO FORMATION

RIVERBANK FORMATION

TURLOCK LAKE FORMATION

MEHRTEN FORMATION

DATA UNAVAILABLE

WATER

SITE BOUNDARY

BOUNDARY OF CORCORAN CLAY

Path: C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012RI_Summary\Fig 2-6 Geologic_Units.mxd

Page 47: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

Merced River

San Joaquin River

Tuolumne River

Turlock

Merced

Montpelier

Riverbank

Fahr Creek

Warnersville

El Nido-Stevinson

Manteca

TURLOCKSUB-BASIN

MERCEDSUB-BASIN

MODESTOSUB-BASIN

DELTA-MENDOTASUB-BASIN

EASTERN SAN JOAQUINSUB-BASIN

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 2-7

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEYGROUNDWATER BASIN6/17/10 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

SITE BOUNDARY

GROUNDWATER SUB-BASINS

SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGIC UNITS

LEGEND

1.5 0 1.5 30.75

SCALE IN MILES

£Path: C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012RI_Summary\Fig 2-7 SJValley GWbasin.mxd

Page 48: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

@A@A @A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A@A@A@A

@A @A

@A@A@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A @A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A @A

@A @A

@A@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A @A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A @A

@A@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

Merced

River

Turlock

Livingston

Hilmar

TRLK-15

TRLK-14

TRLK-13TRLK-02

TRLK-01

TRLKFP-02

TRLKFP-01

TRLKMW-05

0.5 0 0.5 10.25

SCALE IN MILES

£

SOURCES: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES WATER DATA LIBRARY; USGS DATA SERIES 325: GROUND-WATER QUALITY DATA IN THE CENTRAL EASTSIDE SAN JOAQUIN BASIN 2006: RESULTS FROM THE CALIFORNIA GAMA PROGRAM.

LEGEND

SITE BOUNDARY

@A CALIFORNIA GAMA PROGRAM GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA WELLS

@A CALIFORNIA DWR WATER DATA LIBRARY WELLS

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 2-8

REGIONAL WELLLOCATIONS6/17/10 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

Path: C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012RI_Summary\Fig 2-8 Regional Wells.mxd

Page 49: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 50: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 51: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 52: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 53: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 54: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 55: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©

0.0002 FT/FT

69

69.2

69.4

MW-2868.86

MW-2768.88

MW-2669.24

MW-2369.42

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

2/22/11 TJ

FIGURE 4-3a

LOWER AQUIFER POTENTIOMETRICSURFACE MAP (JANUARY 2010)

LEGEND

DATA NOT USED IN CONTOURING

LOWER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL©̈©©

65.8 POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE ELEVATION (FT. MSL)

*

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOUR(DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE)

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-3a LA POT 2010.mxd

Page 56: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©

0.0001 FT/FT

70.60

70.70

70.80

MW-2870.58

MW-2770.57

MW-2670.62

MW-2370.88

MW-4062.14*

MW-3861.56*

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

2/22/11 TJ

LEGEND

DATA NOT USED IN CONTOURING

LOWER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL©̈©©

70.57 POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE ELEVATION (FT. MSL)

*

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOUR(DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE)

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

FIGURE 4-3b

LOWER AQUIFER POTENTIOMETRICSURFACE MAP (JANUARY 2011)

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-3b LA POT 2011.mxd

Page 57: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 58: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 59: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer
Page 60: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©

64

63

MW-2862.96

MW-2763.10

MW-2663.46

MW-2363.91

MW-4053.21*

MW-3853.67*

AMERICAN AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

LEGEND

DATA NOT USED IN CONTOURINGWELL SCREENED IN DEEPER ZONE

LOWER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL©̈©©

70.57 POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE ELEVATION (FT. MSL)

*

POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE CONTOUR(DASHED WHERE APPROXIMATE)

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-4c POT Apr 2012 LA.mxd

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£TJDPG

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BYPROJECT NO.

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

01.HCC.2012 6/21/12

0.0002 FT/FT

FIGURE 4-4c

LOWER AQUIFER POTENTIOMETRICSURFACE MAP (APRIL 2012)

Page 61: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LEGENDFT = FEET WELL SCREENED IN UPPER AQUIFER SHALLOW ZONE

MSL = MEAN SEA LEVEL WELL SCREENED IN UPPER AQUIFER SUPPLY ZONE

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 4-5a

UPPER AQUIFER VERTICAL GRADIENT CHARTS7/30/12 SM JJ

LOCATION

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

Jan�

07

May

�07

Sep�

07

Jan�

08

May

�08

Sep�

08

Jan�

09

May

�09

Sep�

09

Jan�

10

May

�10

Sep�

10

Jan�

11

May

�11

Sep�

11

Jan�

12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�06

MW�22

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

Feb�

98Ju

n�98

Oct

�98

Feb�

99Ju

n�99

Oct

�99

Feb�

00Ju

n�00

Oct

�00

Feb�

01Ju

n�01

Oct

�01

Feb�

02Ju

n�02

Oct

�02

Feb�

03Ju

n�03

Oct

�03

Feb�

04Ju

n�04

Oct

�04

Feb�

05Ju

n�05

Oct

�05

Feb�

06Ju

n�06

Oct

�06

Feb�

07Ju

n�07

Oct

�07

Feb�

08Ju

n�08

Oct

�08

Feb�

09Ju

n�09

Oct

�09

Feb�

10Ju

n�10

Oct

�10

Feb�

11Ju

n�11

Oct

�11

Feb�

12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�11

MW�18

75

77

79

81

83

85

87

Feb�

98Ju

n�98

Oct

�98

Feb�

99Ju

n�99

Oct

�99

Feb�

00Ju

n�00

Oct

�00

Feb�

01Ju

n�01

Oct

�01

Feb�

02Ju

n�02

Oct

�02

Feb�

03Ju

n�03

Oct

�03

Feb�

04Ju

n�04

Oct

�04

Feb�

05Ju

n�05

Oct

�05

Feb�

06Ju

n�06

Oct

�06

Feb�

07Ju

n�07

Oct

�07

Feb�

08Ju

n�08

Oct

�08

Feb�

09Ju

n�09

Oct

�09

Feb�

10Ju

n�10

Oct

�10

Feb�

11Ju

n�11

Oct

�11

Feb�

12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�12

MW�19

75

77

79

81

83

85

87

Jan�

09

Feb�

09

Mar

�09

Apr

�09

May

�09

Jun�

09

Jul�0

9

Aug

�09

Sep�

09

Oct

�09

Nov

�09

Dec

�09

Jan�

10

Feb�

10

Mar

�10

Apr

�10

May

�10

Jun�

10

Jul�1

0

Aug

�10

Sep�

10

Oct

�10

Nov

�10

Dec

�10

Jan�

11

Feb�

11

Mar

�11

Apr

�11

May

�11

Jun�

11

Jul�1

1

Aug

�11

Sep�

11

Oct

�11

Nov

�11

De c

�11

Jan�

12

Feb�

12

Mar

�12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�17

MW�29

Page 62: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

LEGENDFT = FEET

MSL = MEAN SEA LEVEL

WELL SCREENED IN UPPER AQUIFER SUPPLY ZONE

WELL SCREENED IN LOWER AQUIFER

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 4-5b

UPPER TO LOWER AQUIFER VERTICAL GRADIENT CHARTS7/30/12 SM JJ

LOCATION

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

35

45

55

65

75

85M

ar�0

8

Jul�0

8

Nov

�08

Mar

�09

Jul�0

9

Nov

�09

Mar

�10

Jul�1

0

Nov

�10

Mar

�11

Jul�1

1

Nov

�11

Mar

�12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�22

MW�23

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

Jan�

09

Feb�

09M

ar�0

9

Apr

�09

May

�09

Jun�

09

Jul�0

9

Aug

�09

Sep�

09

Oct

�09

Nov

�09

Dec

�09

Jan�

10

Feb�

10M

ar�1

0

Apr

�10

May

�10

Jun�

10

Jul�1

0

Aug

�10

Sep�

10

Oct

�10

Nov

�10

Dec

�10

Jan�

11

Feb�

11M

ar�1

1

Apr

�11

May

�11

Jun�

11

Jul�1

1

Aug

�11

Sep�

11

Oct

�11

Nov

�11

De c

�11

Jan�

12

Feb�

12

Mar

�12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�25

MW�26

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

Jan�

09

Feb�

09M

ar�0

9

Apr

�09

May

�09

Jun�

09

Jul�0

9

Aug

�09

Sep�

09

Oct

�09

Nov

�09

Dec

�09

Jan�

10

Feb�

10M

ar�1

0

Apr

�10

May

�10

Jun�

10

Jul�1

0

Aug

�10

Sep�

10

Oct

�10

Nov

�10

Dec

�10

Jan�

11

Feb�

11M

ar�1

1

Apr

�11

May

�11

Jun�

11

Jul�1

1

Aug

�11

Sep�

11

Oct

�11

Nov

�11

De c

�11

Jan�

12

Feb�

12

Mar

�12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

t�ab

ove�

msl

)

MW�28

MW�29

Page 63: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�5cLOWER�AQUIFER�VERTICAL�GRADIENT�CHART

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

vati

on�(f

eet�

abov

e�m

ean�

sea�

leve

l)

MW�28�(C�Zone) MW�38�(E�Zone)

Page 64: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©

MW-4059 MW-38

64

MW-2631-33

MW-2363-65

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

JOHNSON AVENUE

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

PROJECT NO. DRAWN BYRAL

APPR. BY02.HCC.2012 TJ

LEGEND

LOWER AQUIFER MONITORING WELL©̈©©

J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\LwrAqDGFS\Figure 2b MW Age dating.mxd

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

FIGURE 4-6

LOWER AQUIFER AGE DATINGMONITORING WELL LOCATIONS

63-65:

* BASED ON CFC 12 DATA FOR LOWER AQUIFER, RECHARGE ONSITE (SEE SECTION 3.2)

DATE

06/05/12

Estimated age in years before presentof the source of groundwater comprisingthe Lower Aquifer.

Page 65: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

20%

20%

20%

40%

40%

40%

60%

60%

60%

80%

80%

80%

Mg

Ca

20%

20%

20%

40%

40%

40%

60%

60%

60%

80%

80%

80%

SO4

Cl

SO4 +

Cl Ca + M

g

Na + KHC

O3 +

CO

3

80%

80%60

%60%

40%

40%20

%20%

LOWER AQUIFERTRI-LINEAR DIAGRAM

DATE

1/17/11

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

LOCATION

B-1

TITLE

FIGURE

NOTES:

Ca = CALCIUM

Cl = CHLORIDE

CO3 = CARBONATE

HCO3 = BICARBONATE

K = POTASSIUM

Mg = MAGNESIUM

Na = SODIUM

SYMBOL DEFINITIONS

8/12/2010

9/7/2010

9/27/2010

10/19/2010

12/14/2010

COLOR DEFINITIONS

DW-68

DW-73

DW-108

IN-03

LEGEND

K = POTASSIUM

Mg = MAGNESIUM

Na = SODIUM

SO4 = SULFATE

4-7

Page 66: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&< &<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&<

&

&

&

&

&

&

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<&<

&<

&

&

&

& &

&

&

&

MW-18

MW-19

MW-22

MW-24

MW-25

MW-29

MW-01

MW-02MW-03

MW-04

MW-05

MW-06MW-07

MW-08

MW-09

MW-10

MW-11MW-12

MW-13

MW-14

MW-15

MW-16

MW-17

MW-20

MW-21

DW-108

DW-38C

DW-38D

DW-54

DW-68

DW-73

IN-03

IN-07

MW-23

MW-26

MW-27

MW-28

MW-38

MW-40

DW-23

DW-24

DW-27A

DW-29 DW-31

DW-34

DW-74

DW-99

AUGUST AVENUE

JOHNSON AVENUE

AMERICAN AVENUE

LAN

DER

AVE

NU

E

CO

LUM

BUS

AVEN

UE

OSLO ROAD

OSL

O S

TREE

T

LATERAL No. 6

LATE

RAL

No.

7

S-1

S-3

S-6

S-29S-30

S-31 S-35

S-25

S-5

S-7

S-4

S-2

S-33 S-24

S-40S-26

S-13

S-2

S-41

S-20

S-21

S-8

S-23

£0 1,000

SCALE IN FEET

LEGEND

&<

!

S-2

MONITORING WELL

SUPPLY WELL

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

REUSE AREA

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

2/10/11 TJDPG

FIGURE 4-8

STIFF DIAGRAMS UPPER AND LOWER AQUIFERS

(2010 AVERAGED DATA)C:\G

IS\H

ilmar

\Rep

orts

\Lw

rAqE

xt\F

ig 5

-2 2

010

Avg

Stif

f Dia

gram

s.m

xd

LOWER AQUIFER ZONE

UPPER AQUIFER SHALLOW ZONE

UPPER AQUIFER SUPPLY ZONE

ZONE DESIGNATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS:

CHLORIDE

MILLIEQUIVALENT PER LITER

CALCIUM

Cl

meq/L

Ca

POTASSIUM

CARBONATE AS CaCO3

BICARBONATE AS CaCO3

K

CO3

HCO3

SULFATE

MAGNESIUM

SODIUM

SO4

Mg

Na

60 6040 40020 20

Na+K

Ca

Mg SO4

HCO3+CO

Cl

Cations Anionsmeq/L

3

STIFF DIAGRAM

STIFF DIAGRAMS CREATED FROM AVERAGESOF DATA COLLECTED IN 2010.

NOTES:

Page 67: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�9a

IODIDE�VS.�CHLORIDE1

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

�1�Third�and�fourth�quater�2010�sample�data�was�used�for�all�wells�except�MW�38�and�MW�40,�which�were�sampled�in�first�quarter�2011.�

MW�01MW�02

MW�03

MW�04

MW�05 MW�06MW�07

MW�08

MW�09

MW�10MW�11

MW�12

MW�13

MW�14

MW�15

MW�16MW�17

MW�20MW�21

MW�24

MW�25

MW�29

DW�38C

DW�38D

MW�26

MW�27

MW�28

DW�108

DW�54

DW�68

DW�73

IN�03

IN�07MW�40

MW�38

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Iodi

de�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Chloride�(milligrams�per�liter)

Upper�Aquifer�Shallow�Zone Upper�Aquifer�Supply�Zone Lower�Aquifer�C�Zone Lower�Aquifer�D�Zone�and�below

Locations�with�non�detect� results�(<0.01�mg/L) for�Iodide�have�not�been�plotted�and�include�the�following:

MW�20

MW�21

Page 68: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�9b

IODIDE�VS.�SODIUM1

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

�1�Third�and�fourth�quater�2010�sample�data�was�used�for�all�wells�except�MW�38�and�MW�40,�which�were�sampled�in�first�quarter�2011.�

MW�01MW�02

MW�03

MW�04

MW�05

MW�06

MW�07

MW�08

MW�09

MW�10MW�11

MW�12

MW�13

MW�14

MW�15

MW�16 MW�17

MW�20MW�21

MW�24

MW�25

MW�29

DW�38C

DW�38D

MW�26

MW�27

MW�28

DW�108

DW�54

DW�68

DW�73

IN�03

IN�07 MW�40

MW�38

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Iodi

de�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Sodium�(milligrams�per�liter)

Upper�Aquifer�Shallow�Zone Upper�Aquifer�Supply�Zone Lower�Aquifer�C�Zone Lower�Aquifer�D�Zone�and�below

Locations�with�non�detect� results��(<0.01�mg/L) for�Iodide�have�not�been�plotted�and�include�the�following:

MW�20

MW�21

Page 69: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

150

100

200

250

150

300

350 200

400

250

450

300350

400

450

500

550

500

600

50

550 650

100

50

700

600

750

800

600

100

500

50

50

500

550

550

50

DW-68

IN-07DW-54

DW-38D

DW-38C

IN-05/DW-73

IN-03/DW-09

MW-28 MW-27

MW-26

LATERA

L No.

6

LATERAL No. 7

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

3/2/11 TJ

FIGURE 4-10a

LOWER AQUIFER IODIDE ANDCHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS

LEGEND

SUPPLY WELL!(

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

MONITORING WELL©̈©©

NOTES:

Q3 AND Q4 2010 SAMPLE DATA USED EXCEPTFOR MW-38 AND MW-40 WHICH WERE SAMPLEDIN Q1 2011.

IODIDE CONTOUR (ug/L)

CHLORIDE CONTOUR (mg/L)

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-10a Iodide-Chloride LA.mxd

Page 70: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

&<

&<&<

&<

&<

&< &<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<

&<&<

&<

50

300

100

200

400

500

20015

0

100

200

50

200

150

100

400100

100

MW-17

MW-16 MW-15

MW-14

MW-13

MW-12

MW-11

MW-10

MW-09

MW-08

MW-07MW-06

MW-05

MW-04

MW-03MW-02

MW-01

LATERA

L No.

6

LATERAL No. 7

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

3/2/11 TJ

FIGURE 4-10b

UPPER AQUIFER IODIDE ANDCHLORIDE CONCENTRATIONS

LEGEND

SUPPLY WELL!(

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

MONITORING WELL&<

NOTES:

Q3 AND Q4 2010 SAMPLE DATA USED EXCEPTFOR MW-38 AND MW-40 WHICH WERE SAMPLEDIN Q1 2011.

IODIDE CONTOUR (ug/L)

CHLORIDE CONTOUR (mg/L)

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-10b Iodide-Chloride UA.mxd

Page 71: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

©̈©©©̈©©

@A

@A

@A@A @A@A@A@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A@A@A@A

@A @A

@A@A@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A @A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A

@A @A

@A @A

@A@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A @A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A @A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A @A

@A@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A @A

@A

@A@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

@A

Merced

River

aquin River

Turlock

Hilmar

MW-38

MW-40

TRLK-15

TRLK-14

TRLK-13TRLK-02

TRLK-01

TRLKFP-02

TRLKFP-01

0.5 0 0.5 10.25

SCALE IN MILES

£

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 4-11

ESTIMATED AREA OF ELEVATEDREGIONAL TDS LEVELS3/25/11 JJSM

DATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

LOCATION

SOURCES: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES WATER DATA LIBRARY; USGS DATA SERIES 325: GROUND-WATER QUALITY DATA IN THE CENTRAL EASTSIDE SAN JOAQUIN BASIN 2006: RESULTS FROM THE CALIFORNIA GAMA PROGRAM.

LEGEND

SITE BOUNDARY

@A CALIFORNIA GAMA PROGRAM GROUNDWATER QUALITY DATA WELLS

@A CALIFORNIA DWR WATER DATA LIBRARY WELLS

ESTIMATED AREA OF ELEVATED REGIONAL TDS LEVELS

C:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\LwrAqExt\Fig 5-7 Estimated TDS.mxd

MONITORING WELL©̈©©

Page 72: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

&<&<

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©

198' 830198' 1100

228' 1200189.5' 1200

198' 680236' 710

200' 840239' 520

188' 610233' 460

173' 360248' 290

190' 1000230' 520

190.5' 1000233' 580

174.5' 700182.75' 750

195.75' 1000230.5' 1000

196.25' 820229.5' 820

MW-40260' 980305' 1100

MW-38303' 1200350' 1300

MW-40850

MW-381100

MW-281100

MW-271300

SB-09

SB-07

SB-06

SB-05

SB-03

HP-07

HP-06

HP-04

HP-03

HP-02

HP-01

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

MW-26850

MW-23710

SB-08

HP-05

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

3/3/11 TJ

LEGEND

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION(DATA COLLECTED IN 2007-2010)

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (mg/L)

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE DEPTH (FT-BGS)

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

MONITORING WELL (DATA COLLECTED BETWEEN OCTOBER AND DECEMBER 2010)©̈©©

NOTES:

25 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS (mg/L)

FT-BGS FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE

mg/L MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

125' 12.8

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-12 TDS in LA.mxd

FIGURE 4-12

TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDSIN GROUNDWATER SAMPLES

LOWER AQUIFER

Page 73: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

!

!

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©

198' 660

228' 530

198' 380

189.5' 650

173' 94248' 88

198' 220236' 250

200' 390239' 220

190' 460230' 210

188' 260233' 140

190.5' 540233' 270

174.5' 51182.75' 54

195.75' 470230.5' 520

196.25' 370229.5' 380

MW-40260' 400305' 510

MW-38303' 550350' 630MW-40

370 MW-38530

MW-28500

MW-27550

SB-09

SB-07

SB-06

SB-05

SB-03

HP-07

HP-06

HP-05HP-04 HP-03

HP-02

HP-01

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

MW-26370

MW-23300

SB-08

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

3/3/11 SM

FIGURE 4-13

CHLORIDE IN GROUNDWATER SAMPLESLOWER AQUIFER

LEGEND

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION(DATA COLLECTED IN 2007-2010)

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

CHLORIDE (mg/L)

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE DEPTH (FT-BGS)

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

MONITORING WELL (DATA COLLECTED BETWEEN OCTOBER AND DECEMBER 2010)©̈©©

NOTES:

25 CHLORIDE (mg/L)

FT-BGS FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE

mg/L MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

125' 12.8

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-13 Chloride in LA.mxd

Page 74: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

!

!

©̈©©

©̈©©

©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©©̈©©

198' 290228' 270

198' 240

189.5' 260

173' 99248' 81

198' 190236' 220

200' 220239' 160

190' 250230' 150

188' 170233' 140

190.5' 280233' 190

174.5' 72182.75' 68

195.75' 250230.5' 260

196.25' 220229.5' 210

MW-40260' 250305' 270 MW-38

303' 280350' 340MW-40

210 MW-38260

MW-28260

MW-27290

SB-09

SB-07

SB-06

SB-05

SB-03

HP-07

HP-06

HP-05HP-04 HP-03

HP-02

HP-01

JOHNSON AVENUE

OSLO ROA

D

AUGUST AVENUE

LANDER AVENUE

OSLO STREET

COLUMBUS AVENUE

MW-26220

MW-23190

SB-08

0 1,200

SCALE IN FEET

£HILMAR CHEESE COMPANY

HILMAR, CALIFORNIA

DATE DRAWN BY

DPGAPPR. BY

3/3/11 SM

FIGURE 4-14

SODIUM IN GROUNDWATER SAMPLESLOWER AQUIFER

LEGEND

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION(DATA COLLECTED IN 2007-2010)

TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT LATERAL CANAL

SODIUM (mg/L)

GRAB GROUNDWATER SAMPLE DEPTH (FT-BGS)

EXTENT OF HCC FACILITY AND HISTORICAL PRIMARY LANDS

MONITORING WELL (DATA COLLECTED BETWEEN OCTOBER AND DECEMBER 2010)©̈©©

NOTES:

25 SODIUM (mg/L)

FT-BGS FEET BELOW GROUND SURFACE

mg/L MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

125' 12.8

Path: J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\2012\RISummary\Figure 4-14 Sodium in LA.mxd

Page 75: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�15ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�23

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 76: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�16ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�26

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 77: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�17ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�27

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 78: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�18ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�28

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 79: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�19ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�38�

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 80: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

FIGURE�4�20ANALYTICAL�AND�GROUNDWATER�ELEVATION�DATA�FOR�MW�40

Hilmar�Cheese�CompanyHilmar,�California

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

,�Nit

rate

/Nit

rite

�as�

Nit

roge

n,�S

ulfa

te,�

Calc

ium

,�Mag

nesi

um,�M

anga

nese

,�Pot

assi

um,�

Sodi

um�(m

illig

ram

s�pe

r�lit

er)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

�&�B

icar

bona

te�

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

65

75

tion

�a�

leve

l)

Prim

ary�

Land

�Use

�Sto

pped

Dec

embe

r�201

0�A

pplic

atio

n�of

�Reu

se�W

ater

initi

ated

�Apr

il�20

11

0

225

450

675

0

500

1000

1500

Chlo

ride

�and

�Sod

ium

�(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

Tota

l�Dis

solv

ed�S

olid

s�(T

DS)

(mill

igra

ms�

per�

liter

)

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

35

45

55

65

1/1/08 5/1/08 9/1/08 1/1/09 5/1/09 9/1/09 1/1/10 5/1/10 9/1/10 1/1/11 5/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/12

Gro

undw

ater

�Ele

va(f

eet�a

bove

�mea

n�se

a

ChlorideTotal�Dissolved�Solids Dissolved�Sodium

Groundwater�Elevation

Non�detect�results�plotted�as�half�of�the�reporting�limit.

Page 81: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

B

B

IN-02

IN-01

SB-12

SB-10S-64

AUGUST AVENUE

LAN

DER

AVE

NU

E

£0 200

SCALE IN FEET

LEGEND

S-2

HILMAR CHEESE COMPANYHILMAR, CALIFORNIA

FIGURE 4-21

IN-1 VICINITYGRAB GROUNDWATER DATA

06/05/12 TJRALDATE DRAWN BY APPR. BY

02.HCC.2012PROJECT NO.

J:\GIS\Hilmar\Reports\LwrAqDGFS\Figure 3 GG Data.mxd

SOIL BORING LOCATION

All data in mg/L, except as noted.

SB-12183 230.5

Alkalinity, Total as CaC03 191 586

Bromide <1.0 0.24

Chloride 140 108

Dissolved Boron <0.10 <0.10

Dissolved Calcium 16 23

Dissolved Magnesium 7.29 9.36

Dissolved Manganese 0.218 0.104

Dissolved Potassium <10 <10

Dissolved Sodium 126 135

Flouride <0.50 <0.10

Iodide (ug/L) 160 69

Solids, total dissolved 375 555

Sulfate <2.5 22.2

B WELL DESTROYED APRIL 12, 2012

SB-1022.5 82.5 111.5 174.5 216.5

Alkalinity, Total as CaC03 311 750 246 174 531

Bromide 0.51 0.36 <0.20 1.1 0.32

Chloride 215 279 84.2 327 170

Dissolved Boron 0.236 0.185 <0.10 0.105 0.124

Dissolved Calcium 50.4 165 24.2 39.6 120

Dissolved Magnesium 13.5 46 13 14.2 45.6

Dissolved Manganese 3.81 0.813 0.678 0.827 0.834

Dissolved Potassium 27.1 <10 <10 <10 <10

Dissolved Sodium 156 258 113 193 152

Flouride 0.27 0.14 0.14 0.17 <0.10

Iodide (ug/L) 52 88 150 390 110

Solids, total dissolved 1030 J 1330 355 732 432

Sulfate 80.8 88.7 19.4 26.4 37.6

Depth

Page 82: HCC Lower Aquifer RI Report Final 082012...Aug 20, 2012  · The locations of soil bor ings, Hydropunch® samples, and monitoring wells are provided on Figure 21. TheLower Aquifer

� � �

� �

������������ ��������

��������������������� �����Hilmar�Cheese�Company,�Hilmar,�California�

August�20,�2012�

� � �

� � Prepared�By:�

� �9083�Foothills�Blvd.,�Suite�1370�

Roseville,�California�95747�

916.367.5111�