Laserfiche WebLink
l <br /> April 2, 2001 <br /> 52439 1 <br /> Margaret Lagorio, Supervising REHS <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> Page 2 <br /> ' a December 6,2000 letter to Newark(PHS/EHD,2000c),PHS/EHD indicated that the four wells associated <br /> with the 210,000-gallon# 6 fuel oil UST formerly located at the Site must be destroyed prior to issuance of <br /> the site closure letter and requested a work plan and permit for well destruction.. Harding ESE submitted a <br /> Well Destruction Work Plan and Permit Application in a letter dated January 3,200 1. The PHS/EHS granted <br /> verbal approval of the work plan in a telephone conversation on January 5,2001 <br /> ' WELL DESTRUCTION ACTIVITIES <br /> All work was completed in compliance with Harding ESE's approved work planand site-specific Health and <br /> Safety Plan. Destruction of the wells was performed in accordance with the requirements of San Joaquin <br /> County Well Standards(Section 13.17)and.tle State of California Well Standards Bulletins 74-81 and 74-90 <br /> (California Department of Water Resources, 1981 and 1991). The four monitoring wells were installed in <br /> locations surrounding the former 210,000 gallon UST where no contaminated soil was present. <br /> On January 10,2001 Woodward Drilling Company of Rio Vista, California a C-57 licensed(710079)well <br /> driller mobilized to the site with a grout pump and drill rig. A Harding ESE environmental scientist was on <br /> site to direct the well destruction activities. All four wells were gauged with a steel tape to measure the total <br /> depth and to insure that no obstructions were present to interfere with filling or sealing. After gauging,the <br /> wells were pressure grouted with a tremie pipe from the bottom up,to a depth near the ground level. The <br /> grout consisted of neat cement mix of less that 6 gallons of clean water per sack of cement. After each well <br /> was grouted,Woodward Drilling returned to each well and over-drilled the top 3 to 5 feet of each 2-inch <br /> diameter well casing with an 18-inch diameter solid flight auger. This over drilled section of well was cleared <br /> of drill cuttings and grouted full with neat cement placed directly into the borehole. PHS/EHD representative, { <br /> Lori Duncan,was onsite to observe the well destruction activities and inspect the final destruction of the four <br /> r wells. <br /> REQUEST FOR NO FURTHER ACTION REQURIED DETERMINATION(CASE CLOSUER 1 <br /> LETTER) <br /> ` Based on the information submitted in the above-listed reports, including the requested Statement of Current <br /> Record of Fee Title Holder(Appendix B,Harding ESE, 2000),Harding ESE requests that the RWQCB <br /> concur with the PHS/EHD's determination that No Further Action is Required at this Site associated with the <br /> two referenced investigation areas. <br /> I <br /> l � <br /> .Harding ESE <br /> A MACTEC COMPANY <br />