My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CHEROKEE
>
521
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544430
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2019 2:20:17 PM
Creation date
5/7/2019 2:07:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0544430
PE
3526
FACILITY_ID
FA0005370
FACILITY_NAME
PARMAR TEXACO
STREET_NUMBER
521
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
CHEROKEE
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
LODI
Zip
95240
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
521 N CHEROKEE LN
P_LOCATION
02
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\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.
/
322
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
19 April 1997 <br /> Ms. Linda Turkatte <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> P.O.Box 338 <br /> Stockton, CA 95201-0388 <br /> Re: Work Plan Addendum <br /> 521 North Cherokee Lane, Lodi, California <br /> Site Code: 1324 <br /> Dear Ms. Turkatte: <br /> Pursuant to our February 1997 conversation, I have prepared a second addendum to the <br /> 13 March 1994 work plan. This addendum updates the 1 August 1995 addendum to <br /> include tasks which will allow an evaluation of the, 'risk" posed by the gasoline released <br /> at this site. Upon your acceptance of this addendum, a cost analysis will be performed; <br /> and along with the scope of work, it will be submitted to SB2004 Fund personnel for "pre- <br /> approval". <br /> Based on the suggested policy of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and <br /> the data collected thus far, I recommend monitor wells be installed at the apparent <br /> perimeter (based on the HydroPunch® data) of the plume. With the exception of MW-1, <br /> groundwater at each of the monitor wells will be monitored to allow an assessment of <br /> plume stability and biological activity. <br /> In order to evaluate 'receptors", a survey of supply wells needs to be performed. <br /> Additionally, a health risk assessment needs to be performed. Because of a lack of soil <br /> data and model sensitivity, I propose to collect air samples to evaluate potential <br /> volatilization exposures. <br /> As stated in the 1 August 1995 addendum, I recommend destroying MW-1 as it is no <br /> longer serviceable and is apparently well within the groundwater contaminant plume. As <br /> it may be possible to use MWA with a vapor extraction system, the destruction should not <br /> be performed until after a vapor extraction test at the site. <br /> In addition, because the pump island area has yet to be investigated and significant <br /> residual soil contamination has not yet been reported at this site, I recommend collecting <br /> soil data from beneath each of the pump islands to evaluate potential residual hydrocarbon <br /> sources. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.