My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CHRISMAN
>
25700
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0508450
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2019 11:58:23 AM
Creation date
5/29/2019 11:10:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0508450
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0008087
FACILITY_NAME
DDJC-TRACY
STREET_NUMBER
25700
STREET_NAME
CHRISMAN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95376
APN
25207002
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
25700 CHRISMAN RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
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.
/
2212
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
h <br /> MEMORANDUM • <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 Q CALNET: 8-494-3000 <br /> TO: Antonia K. J. Vorster FROM: Camilla Williams <br /> Senior WRC Engineer Engineering Geologist <br /> DATE: 12 November 1992 SIGNATURE: ✓r� JCGG/A � <br /> SUBJECT: REVIEW OF DRAFT FINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS) REPORT AND PROPOSED PLAN FOR <br /> OPERABLE UNIT NO. 1, DEFENSE DISTRIBUTION REGION WEST (DDRW), TRACY, SAN <br /> JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> I have reviewed the Draft Final FS Report and Proposed Plan (PP) for Operable Unit <br /> No. 1 (OU-1) at DDRW, Tracy submitted on 13 October 1992. A response to our <br /> comments on the draft versions of the FS Report and the PP were provided. It <br /> appears that the Draft Final FS Report and PP were revised, sometimes substantially, <br /> to reflect many of the Board's concerns, but there are still some outstanding <br /> concerns which are discussed in separate sections below. However, based on the past <br /> cooperativeness and good-faith efforts of DDRW, Tracy, we approve the Draft Final FS <br /> Report and Proposed Plan. <br /> DRAFT FINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT <br /> 1 . In our review of the Draft FS Report, letter dated 7 August 1992, we requested <br /> that cost analyses be developed for different aquifer cleanup scenarios. The <br /> analysis presented in the Draft Final FS Report was unsatisfactory. Because <br /> DDRW, Tracy has retracted the originally proposed cleanup levels of 2.5 <br /> micrograms per liter (µg/1 ) for trichloroethylene (TCE) and 0.7 µg/l for <br /> tetrachloroethylene (PCE) , cleanup of the aquifer to levels greater than these <br /> concentrations may not comply with all of our applicable or relevant and <br /> appropriate requirements (ARARs) , particularly Resolution No. 92-49. <br /> Tracy has agreed to use the aquifer cleanup levels of 5.0 µg/1 for TCE and <br /> 0.5 µg/l for PCE because these levels of remediation have been established for <br /> DDRW, Sharpe. Sharpe proposed 0.5 µg/l as an aquifer cleanup level for PCE <br /> based on the assumption that when the overall cancer risk associated with <br /> cleanup of TCE is 5.0 Ag/l , other carcinogens are reduced to levels below <br /> detection limits. The concentration of 0.5 µg/l is neither the Secondary <br /> Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) nor the 10-` cancer risk estimate for PCE. In <br /> addition, the 10_s cancer risk estimate for TCE is not 5.0 Ag/l , but is 3.0 <br /> Ag/l . <br /> The Project Managers at DDRW, Tracy and DDRW, Sharpe should meet and discuss the <br /> proposed aquifer cleanup levels. If the goal of DDRW is to have consistent <br /> aquifer cleanup levels at both sites, then the aquifer cleanup levels for the <br /> contaminants of concern should be based on valid water quality criteria and <br /> should not be represent a potentially unachievable cleanup objective for either <br /> site. <br /> 2. Table 2.2-6 presents the proposed cleanup levels and proposed treatment <br /> standards for each of the constituents of concern for OU-1 . It is apparent that <br /> there is still confusion between the aquifer cleanup level and the treatment <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.