SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

• MEMORANDUM* CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD - CENTRAL VALLEY REGION 3443 Routier Road Phone: (916) 361-5600 Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 ATSS Phone: 8-495-5600 TO: GREG VAUGHN FROM: JEAN McCUE Senior Engineer Water Resource Control Engineer DATE: 8 June 1990 SIGNATURE: ;p(,a.w �)kL " SUBJECT: DALLAS CORPORATION, DBA OVERHEAD/LODI DOOR COMPANY'S ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY The Dallas Corporation, dba Overhead/Lodi Door Company (O/LDC) submitted an annual report for their facility in Lodi on 3 April 1990. The report was prepared by Remediation Services, Inc. (RSI) and included quarterly monitoring data for January 1990. It also included a summary of data collected from January 1989 through January 1990 and the results of a pumping test performed on 7 March 1990. Following are comments on the report: January 1990 Quarterly Monitoring There seems to be a large discrepancy between field measurements and laboratory results of electrical conductivity (EC) . RSI should check to see if the laboratory is following proper holding time procedures. The maximum holding time for EC is twenty- four hours. The EC and pH meter used by RSI for field measurements should be calibrated in the field, to ensure accurate results. The ground water elevations measured in the wells between January 1989 and January 1990 are summarized in Table 4 of the report. The January 1990 depth to water and water elevations for MW-2 are incorrect, according to the field notes in Appendix A. The final depth to water measurement after purging and sampling (53.7 feet) was recorded in the table, instead of the initial depth to water measurement (54.0 feet) . The corrected value seems more consistent with the other data in Table 4. The quarterly ground water monitoring report for January 1990 should have included a calculation of the magnitude and direction of the ground water gradient. Although the report listed ground water elevations in Table 4, no calculation of the gradient is included. The report stated that the Geologist Report in Appendix F contained a discussion of the gradient. However, the Geologist Report interprets the results of the 7 March 1990 pumping test and no discussion of the ground water gradient is included. An accurate site map, showing the water level elevations at each well location, and the magnitude and direction of the ground water gradient should be submitted. Note: There is a typographical error in Table 1 . The concentration of sulfate for MW-1 should be 35 mg/l , instead of < 1 mg/1 , according to the laboratory report. Annual Reoort The annual report should summarize the year-long monitoring results, discuss trends and changes in water quality, and discuss variations in the magnitude and direction of ground water flow over the course of the year. Although most of the data were summarized in tables, no interpretations were included in the report. A summary of :he magnitude and direction of the ground water gradient for the past year should be