My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 1995-2004
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CENTER
>
535
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0524492
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 1995-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/25/2019 6:15:28 PM
Creation date
2/25/2019 2:39:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
1995-2004
RECORD_ID
PR0524492
PE
2959
FACILITY_ID
FA0016428
FACILITY_NAME
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC
STREET_NUMBER
535
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
CENTER
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95203
APN
13732002
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
535 S CENTER ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
WNg
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
355
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
0 0 <br /> James L. Tjosvold, P.E. <br /> August 19, 1996 <br /> Page 8 <br /> FS. Surface soil samples were collected from five off-site locations and subsurface <br /> soil samples were collected from two off-site boreholes. The range of background <br /> values from literature for metals concentrations in soil and groundwater from the <br /> San Joaquin region were also summarized. Background water quality data were not <br /> measured locally near the site but instead were obtained from literature. <br /> Comment: <br /> 4. Page 3-6, Section 3.1.3, Supplemental Soil Investigation <br /> The summary states that results from the field screening analyses did not correlate well with <br /> laboratory analytical results and the soil operable unit feasibility study (OUFS) will use only <br /> laboratory data. It is unclear if sufficient soil samples were taken for laboratory testing to <br /> characterize the investigated areas. <br /> Response: <br /> 4. More than twice the planned number of soil samples were submitted for <br /> laboratory analysis. These data, in conjunction with field observations, collected <br /> during drilling were sufficient for source area delineation. Please see the response <br /> to DTSC's comment#5. <br /> Comment: <br /> 5. Page 4-1, Section 4, Overview of Site Conditions <br /> This section should include a summary of the background soil investigation. The summary <br /> should provide the rationale for sample location and number and discuss the results, <br /> particularly how background levels were established. <br /> Response: <br /> 5. Section 5 of The Final Remedial Investigation and Risk Assessment Report (submitted <br /> to the agencies on August 6, 1993) included a detailed discussion of background soil <br /> and groundwater concentration determination. This discussion will be summarized <br /> in the combined soil and groundwater FS. <br /> Comment: <br /> 6. Page 4-1, Section 4.1.2, Area II Surface Soils <br /> The first paragraph describes polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PNA) concentrations being <br /> in the range of background concentrations. This statement is related to Specific Comment <br /> No. 5 and should be clarified because the background concentration for chemicals which do <br /> not occur naturally should be zero. <br /> The subsequent paragraphs describe the presence of arsenic (1.5 to 231 mg/kg), copper (11.3 <br /> to 1,480 mg/kg), lead (4.9 to 1,268 mg/kg), and PCBs (<2 to 81 mg/kg) in Area II's surface <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.