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
0 <br /> Tracie Billington, P.E. <br /> August 14, 1992 <br /> Page Four <br /> b. Evaluation of the presence of metals above health based <br /> risk levels in filtered samples. <br /> C. Evaluation the impact of potentially naturally <br /> occurring chemicals may have (i.e. arsenic) on the <br /> metals investigation. <br /> 4) The FS indicates there may be a separate monitoring program <br /> to evaluate the performance of the ground water extraction <br /> system. The Department would prefer that all monitoring <br /> requirements be combined in one comprehensive program. We <br /> believe this would be less confusing. <br /> 5) Woodward Clyde presents an argument for keeping bio- <br /> remediation technologies in the FS treatment train. The <br /> Department agrees with this argument. - Weare in support of <br /> any treatment technology that may reduce the time and/or <br /> cost of remediating the DDRW Tracy site. However, the data <br /> presented does not show any advantages to implementing a <br /> bio-treatment program at this time. We therefore recommend <br /> that bio-treatment be continued as a technology to be <br /> evaluated and implemented if further research finds it to be <br /> reasonable. <br /> 6) A proposed plan is a document designed to disseminate <br /> information to the public. Our review found the draft <br /> Proposed Plan lengthy and highly technical. We recommend <br /> that the technical jargon be reduced and the entire document <br /> be rewritten targeting a lay audience. <br /> SPECIFIC FS COMMENTS <br /> 7) Page 1-1 section 1. 1. 1.2 states that the remediation level <br /> will be determined by the Regional Water Quality Board's <br /> nondegredation policy. <br /> The Department is not clear what is meant by remediation <br /> level (i.e. does this refer to aquifer cleanup goals or <br /> effluent discharge requirements?) This statement needs to <br /> be clarified so the proper jurisdictional guidance can be <br /> applied. <br /> 8) Page 1-9 section 1.2 .4 . 1 states that TCE and PCE -are the <br /> primary constituents of concern for OU # 1. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.