Laserfiche WebLink
March 2014 <br /> Super Center Mart <br /> 701 East Charter Way, Stockton <br /> Claim No: 12741 <br /> Water Service. The affected groundwater is not currently being used as a source of drinking water, <br /> and it is highly unlikely that the affected groundwater will be used as a source of drinking water in <br /> the foreseeable future. Other designated beneficial uses of impacted groundwater are not <br /> threatened, and it is highly unlikely that they will be, considering these factors in the context of the <br /> site setting. Remaining petroleum hydrocarbon constituents are limited and stable, and <br /> concentrations are decreasing. Corrective actions have been implemented and additional <br /> corrective actions are not necessary. Any remaining petroleum hydrocarbon constituents do not <br /> pose a significant risk to human health, safety or the environment. <br /> Rationale for Closure under the Policy <br /> • General Criteria: The case meets all eight Policy general criteria. <br /> • Groundwater Specific Criteria: The case meets Policy Criterion 1 by Class 2. The <br /> contaminant plume that exceeds water quality objectives is less than 250 feet in length. <br /> There is no free product. The nearest water supply well or surface water body is greater <br /> than 1,000 feet from the defined plume boundary. The dissolved concentration of benzene <br /> is less than 3,000 micrograms per liter (Ng/L), and the dissolved concentration of methyl <br /> tert-butyl ether(MTBE) is less than 1,000 pg/L. <br /> • Vapor Intrusion to Indoor Air: The case meets the Policy Exclusion for Active Station. Soil <br /> vapor evaluation is not required because the Site is an active commercial petroleum fueling <br /> facility. <br /> • Direct Contact and Outdoor.Air Exposure: This case meets Policy Criterion 3b. Although <br /> no document titled "Risk Assessment' was found in the files reviewed, a professional <br /> assessment of site-specific risk from exposure through the direct exposure pathway was <br /> performed by Fund staff. The assessment of site-specific risk from potential exposure to <br /> residual soil contamination found that maximum concentrations of petroleum constituents <br /> remaining in soil will have no significant risk of adversely affecting human health. The Site <br /> is paved and accidental exposure to site soils is prevented. As an active petroleum fueling <br /> facility, any construction worker working at the Site will be prepared for exposure in their <br /> normal daily work. <br /> Objections to Closure and Responses <br /> According to the Path to Closure page in GeoTracker, the County opposes closure because: <br /> • The conceptual site model is inadequate. <br /> RESPONSE: The conceptual site model as decribed in the Policy is available in GeoTracker. <br /> • Secondary source remains. <br /> RESPONSE: Secondary source as decribed by the Policy was removed by excavation and <br /> active remediation. <br /> • The case does not meet Policy direct contract criteria. <br /> RESPONSE: This case meets Policy Criterion 3b. <br /> Determination <br /> The Fund Manager has notified the tank owners or operators and reviewed the case history of their <br /> tank case. The Fund Manager determines that closure of the tank case is appropriate based upon <br /> that review. The Fund Manager has prepared this review summary report summarizing the <br /> reasons for this determination, provided the Review Summary Report to the applicable regional <br /> board and local agency, as appropriate, with an opportunity for comment on the Review Summary <br /> Report. <br /> Page 2 of 13 <br />