Laserfiche WebLink
�I t <br /> .. ZAl T1 • <br /> t _R QM11: 01 <br /> Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street,Room 2456-B24A Robert C. Doss,P.E <br /> San Francisco,CA 94105 Director <br /> 415/973-7601 Site Remediahop <br /> Fax 415/973-9201 Environmental Services <br /> Internet RLDLQpge.com <br /> August 6, 1996 r,,.,.a,r nm <br /> P.O.Box 7640 <br /> San Francisco,CA 94120 <br /> Ms. Frances E. Anderson <br /> Chief, Sacramento Responsible Parties Unit <br /> r Central California Cleanup Operations Branch <br /> ® California Department of Toxic Substances Control <br /> Region 1 <br /> 10151 Croyden Way, Suite 3 <br /> Sacramento, California 95827-2106 <br /> Proposed Feasibility Study gpplQach and Schedule <br /> Stockton Former Manufact r d Gas Plant Site <br /> Dear Ms. Anderson: <br /> Thank you for your letter of July 2, 1996, which provided clarification and comments on <br /> our meeting notes and schedule submittal of June 6, 1996. Unfortunately, there appear to <br /> be significant issues yet to be resolved in the management of the Stockton site <br /> investigation and mitigation project, and the lack of resolution has resulted in confusion <br /> on PG&E's part regarding your agency's expectations and requirements. Your offer to <br /> meet in resolution of these issues is appreciated, and I look forward to discussing them at <br /> our meeting on August 8, 1996. In preparation for that meeting, I discuss each of these <br /> issues below, in the order presented in your letter. <br /> Establishment of Remedial Action Objectives and Goals for Soil and Groundwater <br /> Your letter disputes our assessment that"...specific groundwater objectives and goals <br /> were not agreed to at the (May 22) meeting. Instead, the agencies requested that the <br /> alternatives evaluated in the feasibility study(FS) address a range of groundwater goals." <br /> In your letter, you stated that the objectives and goals were clearly stated by the DTSC <br /> and Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB), and that"...the objective is to <br /> protect beneficial uses of groundwater and the goal is to cleanup to background or non- <br /> detection concentrations where economically and technically feasible." <br /> PG&E's statement was meant to reflect the fact that final cleanup concentrations have not <br /> been determined for this site. If I interpret your letter correctly, you consider the cleanup <br /> objective and goal to be fixed as described above,with cleanup levels to be evaluated <br /> over a specified range. One end of that range (the starting point, in your letter) would <br /> consist of the objective and goal already discussed. Your letter appears to recognize that <br /> the evaluation will be conducted over a range of cleanup concentrations, in that our <br /> submittal is described as accurately summarizing "the range of levels to be evaluated." <br />