My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
E
>
EL DORADO
>
3105
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0542208
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2019 4:43:05 PM
Creation date
7/24/2019 4:34:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 2
RECORD_ID
PR0542208
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0024243
FACILITY_NAME
CALIFORNIA TANK LINES
STREET_NUMBER
3105
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
EL DORADO
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
17512028
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
3105 S EL DORADO ST
P_LOCATION
01
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.
/
250
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
California Tank Lines August 2014 <br /> 3105 South EI Dorado Street <br /> Claim No: 8489 <br /> Rationale for Closure under the Policy <br /> • General Criteria: The case does not meet all eight Policy general criteria because free <br /> product remains in MW-2. <br /> • Groundwater Risk from Residual Petroleum Hydrocarbons: The case does not meet Policy <br /> criteria because the benzene plume is not defined downgradient of MW-4 and the San <br /> Lorenzo Creek lies approximately 600 feet south of the Site. <br /> • Indoor Vapor Risk from Residual Petroleum Hydrocarbons: The case meets the Policy <br /> Exclusion for an Active Petroleum Fueling Facility. Soil vapor evaluation is not required <br /> because the Site is an active commercial petroleum fueling facility and the release <br /> characteristics do not pose an unacceptable health risk. <br /> • Direct Contact Risk from Residual Petroleum Hydrocarbons: This case meets Policy <br /> Criterion 3b. Although no document titled "Risk Assessment" was found in the files <br /> reviewed, a professional assessment of site-specific risk from exposure through the direct <br /> exposure pathway was performed by Fund staff. The assessment of site-specific risk from <br /> potential exposure to residual soil contamination found that maximum concentrations of <br /> petroleum constituents remaining in soil will have no significant risk of adversely affecting <br /> human health. The Site is paved and accidental exposure to site soils is prevented. As an <br /> active petroleum fueling facility, any construction worker working at the Site will be prepared <br /> for exposure in their normal daily work. <br /> Objections to Closure and Responses <br /> According to the Path to Closure page in GeoTracker, finalized on May 9, 2014, the County <br /> opposes closure because: <br /> • Free product remains. <br /> RESPONSE: We concur. <br /> • Secondary source remains. <br /> RESPONSE: Concur. <br /> • The case does not meet Policy groundwater criteria. <br /> RESPONSE: We concur. <br /> Recommendation <br /> The Fund concurs with the County that the responsible party should resume free product removal <br /> an define the ext #-ofigroundwater contamination downgradient of the source area. <br /> umisani Date Robert Trommer, C.H.G. Date <br /> teer Resource Control Engineer Senior Engineering Geologist <br /> chnical Review Unit Chief, Technical Review Unit <br /> (916) 341-5824 (916) 341-5684 <br /> Page 2 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.