My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
L
>
LOUISE
>
500
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0009276
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/25/2020 10:32:35 AM
Creation date
6/25/2019 8:20:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0009276
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0012033
FACILITY_NAME
PILKINGTON NORTH AMERICA
STREET_NUMBER
500
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
LOUISE
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
LATHROP
Zip
95330
APN
19812008
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
500 E LOUISE AVE
P_LOCATION
07
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\fgarciaruiz
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.
/
294
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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-Environmental Protectio ncy PETE WILSON, Governor <br /> CAOFDR1 A Kt:YIL)NACOPAItH UUMLII <br /> CENTRAL.VALLEY REGION 61V10 <br /> 3443 Routler Road,Suite A Sacramento, CA 95827-3098PHONE: (916)255-3000 <br /> FAX: (916)255.3015 <br /> 27 June 1994 <br /> JUL 6 1994 <br /> Mr. Jon Weiss ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH <br /> Libbey-Owens-Ford PERMIT/SERVICES <br /> P. O. Box 128 <br /> Lathrop, CA 95330 <br /> COMMENTS ON THE SOIL AND GROUND WATER INVESTIGATION REPORT, <br /> TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, LIBBEY-OWENS-FORD (LOF) COMPANY, <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> I have reviewed Condor's May 1994 report entitled Soil and Ground Water Investigation <br /> and Soil Remediation for the tunnel construction project in the wareroom area at the <br /> Libby-Owens-Ford facility in Lathrop. My comments are presented below. <br /> 1. The Executive Summary is too long. It should be brief and concise. It should <br /> succinctly state the objectives of the investigation, whether these objectives have <br /> been met, any additional investigation needed to define the extent of soil and/or <br /> ground water contamination, and recommendations for remediation, if appropriate. <br /> 2. Each section need not have an introduction. <br /> 3. Figure 9 shows SB/HP-16 as "ND". Table 5 shows SB/HP-16 with free product. <br /> 4. Figure 13 shows extraction wells (EWs) 1 and 2 and monitoring well (MW) 93-2 <br /> within the limits of the excavation. The report states that MW 93-2 was damaged <br /> during the excavation and subsequently destroyed. The report does not explain how <br /> EWs 1 and 2 were spared when both wells are within the excavation area. <br /> 5. Figure 4 shows a northwest ground water flow direction with a gradient of 0.004 <br /> ft/ft. Based on this flow direction, there is no MW downgradient of the former <br /> locations of Hydros 1 and 2. Furthermore, the hydropunch sampling program <br /> indicated there was a limited free product and dissolved plume in the vicinity of <br /> Hydros 1 and 2. Therefore, to adequately monitor the presence and fate of hydrau- <br /> lic fluid in the ground, a MW should be placed in each of the former locations of <br /> Hydros 1 and 2 and downgradient of these locations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.