SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

N./ V../ Mr. Doug Wilson and Ms. MArgaset 1.09a6o May 27, 1998 Page 2 unauthorized release, the release site, and the surrounding area possibly affected by the unauthorized release, if any of the fallowing conditions exists'. (i)'There is evidence that surface water or ground water has been or may be aflectcd by the unauthorized release; (2) Free product is found at the site where the uzxauthorized release occurred or in the sturounding area; (3)There is evidence that contat*nated soils are or may be in contact with surface water or ground water; or (4)The regulatory agency requests an investigation, based on the actual.or potential effects of contaminated soil or ground water on nearby surface water or ground water resources or based on the increased risk of fare Of eacplosion." our understanding is that the groundwater in the Liir w area in which the tanks were tocated is in the range of 160 to 200 feet dovwn,that there Was 00 free product found at the site of the tanks, Haat there is no reasonable basis for a belie`that there has been or will be any contamination of groundwater or any increased risk of fire or explosion. As you are aware all of the test results indicated a complete absence of benzene, toluene, etbyl benzene, gasoline or xylene. The additioxtal tests requested and completed on May 20, 1998, indicated that in the three areas tested the method 3550 LUFT test had a result of$1 mgfKg in a category which includes both diesel and oil in an area described as "disj a @ 3 V2' and Wane detected at both the area described as"Pipeline#1 @7a 5'" and"Pipeline#2 @ 3 t�4"'. The initial test results on the initial test using method 3550 LUFT had indicated t dieser in thea 450 - 1500 mgt range on Six samples, and lead in the 7 thrau 30 m e on three sampics. While we trust that the provision of the additional testing requested wW provide you with sufficient information to be able to close this matter and issue a letter stating that no further action is being required, N&. Wason's letter has eaused some confusion. To the extent that finIher acttOn is indeed being required, we would ask that you identify the further action you are requiring, that you state the basis for your requirement, and that you direct such request to the"responsible parties" as defined by 23 CCR § 2720, that is"(2) [i}n the case of any underground storage tank no longer in use, any person,who owned or operated the anderground storage tank immediately before the discontinuation of its use.