Laserfiche WebLink
MEMORANDUM <br /> _ n <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD • CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 Routier Road, Suite A Phone: (916) 255-3000 <br /> Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 CALNET: 8-494-3000 <br /> TO: Gordon L. Boggs FROM: Elizabeth A. Thayer <br /> UGT Program Coordinktor Associate Engineer <br /> DATE: 9 December 1994 SIGNATURE: � .LZ.Ct <br /> SUBJECT: REVISED MONITQRING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, GEWERE, 16 SOUTH <br /> CHEROKEE LANE, LODI, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> Geweke submitted the quarterly report on 20 October 1994 as required in C&A No. 93-701. The <br /> report contained the first analytical results from the site after full-scale inoculation, which <br /> occurred on 16 August 1994. On 12 October 1994, the draft Revised Monitoring and Reporting <br /> Program (RMRP) was sent out for comment and on 31 October 1994, Geweke submitted their <br /> suggested changes by fax. The following comments on the quarterly report and Geweke's <br /> suggested changes are reflected in the final RMRP. <br /> Comments on Ground Water Contamination <br /> Geweke had previously requested that lead and EDB analyses be deleted from the ground water <br /> monitoring. You and I agreed, and Geweke dropped them from future monitoring. However, on <br /> review of the recent quarterly report, MW14 has had consistent EDB contamination. Therefore, <br /> EDB monitoring of MW14 should be reinstated. <br /> Lead was detected on several occasions, at concentrations below the MCL of 50 µg/1, in a number <br /> of wells. The highest concentration was 21 µg/1. I recommend that lead be dropped from <br /> monitoring program. <br /> DCA has consistently been detected in EW1, MW13, and MW14 and has been detected on several <br /> occasions in MW7, MW8, and MW9. Chloroform was recently detected in MW7, MW14, and <br /> EWl. Geweke requested to delete monitoring of halogenated solvents from wells MW6, MW10, <br /> MWll, and MW12 because none has never been detected in those wells. I concur with MW6 and <br /> MW10 because they are upgradient. MW11 and MW12 are both downgradient. I think at least <br /> one of these wells should continue to be monitored, I recommend MW12. HVOC's will continue <br /> to be monitored in the other monitoring wells. <br /> It appears that the plume may be spreading. Concentrations in MW6, upgradient, have increased <br /> for the last 3 quarters, from 80 to 1100 ppb TPHg and MW6 had benzene, at 22 ppb, for the first <br /> time. MW10, a crossgradient well, has shown contamination for the last 4 quarters. Previously it <br /> had several quarters of ND. MW11, downgradient, has also had contamination for the last 4 <br /> quarters. Previously it had several quarters of ND. Ground water extraction for plume control <br /> appears necessary. <br />