Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of 2 <br /> Lori Duncan [EH] <br /> From: Lori Duncan [EHj <br /> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 2:43 PM <br /> To: 'Kirk Larson' <br /> Subject: RE: Site Reviews <br /> Kirk, <br /> The most current data I have for 2905-2908 Ben Holt is Fourth Quarter 2007; groundwater contamination on <br /> the ARCO side (2908) is near well E-10 which reported 700 ppb TPH, 9.6 ppb benzene, 13 ppb MtBE, and 1,100 <br /> ppb TBA. Across the street on the Chevron side (2905) the contamination is more spread out, <br /> with concentrations up to 1,000 ppb TPH, 86 ppb MtBE, 260 .ppb TBA and no benzene. Every well on the <br /> Chevron side, except for the new MW-10C, has reported-concentrations of contamination. <br /> West of I-5 there is a Shell Station, address 3011 W Ben Holt, that the Regional Board would not concur with <br /> the EHD request for closure. The site has MtBE at concentrations of <100 ppb onsite; <5 ppb offsite in the <br /> furtherst down gradient wells, and the.RB said it was not defined. No other contaminants,just MtBE. The site <br /> was subsequently transferred to the RB for oversight. My point being, it is not likely the RB will concur with <br /> closing a site that has the concentrations of contamination currently reported at the Ben Holt comingled plume <br /> site, especially a site that has already impacted, and continues to threaten, a municipal well. <br /> I have absolutely no "expectations" about how much a site investigation will cost. My expectations for sites are <br /> that the responsible parties will follow the regulations in Title 23, define their plumes, conduct feasibility studies { <br /> and/or testing to determine the most cost effective method of remediation, and to implement it. It is my <br /> understanding that when sites are accepted into the clean up fund as a comingled plume, each site brings to the <br /> arrangement their 1.5 million in eligible funding, so this comingled site is less than half way through what is <br /> available to them. <br /> Lori Duncan, Senior REHS <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> Iduncan@sicehd.com <br /> (209)468-0337 phone <br /> (209)468-3433 fax <br /> From: Kirk Larson [mailto:KTLarson@waterboards.ca.gov] <br /> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 2:23 PM <br /> To: Lori Duncan [EH] <br /> Subject: RE: Site Reviews <br /> Regarding, 2905 Ben Holt, it seems no much contamination is left. There is some fuel oxygenates <br /> moving northeast from the southern site, but not much onsite. Are you expecting them to conduct active <br /> remediation? We're at 1.3 million now. How much are you expecting it to cost? Regards, Kirk <br /> Kirk T. Larson, P.G. <br /> Five Year Review Unit <br /> Division of Financial Assistance <br /> 10011 Street <br /> Sacramento, CA 95814 <br /> (916) 341-5663 <br /> 5/15/2008 <br />