Laserfiche WebLink
PUBLIC HEALTH SEM�`CES <br /> pully <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION y m <br /> Ernest M. Fujimoto, M. D., M.P.H., Acting Health Officer <br /> 304 E. Weber Ave., Third Floor • P. O. Box 388 • Stockton, CA 95201 <br /> 209/468-3420 g(a <br /> BINAYAK ACHARYA MAILED JAN 03 1996 <br /> NESTLE USA <br /> 800 NORTH BRAND BOULEVARD <br /> GLENDALE CA 91203 <br /> Re: Former Nestle/Carnation Site Code: 2095 <br /> 4343 Fremont Ave <br /> Stockton CA 95215 <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services, Environmental Health Division has completed review of <br /> the "Revised Remedial Action Plan" dated August 28, 1995 and the "File Review" information, both <br /> prepared by EMCON. PHS/EHD has the following comments for your consideration. <br /> The revised remedial action plan included the results of modelling using the vertical and horizontal <br /> spread (VHS) model. An estimate of 1 percent organic carbon content was used which is not <br /> considered conservative. According to Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology, Domenico and Schwartz <br /> 1990, typical organic carbon contents range from .06% to 2.3%. PHS/EHD contacted your consultant <br /> and was provided a verbal revision of the potential threat to groundwater. Please submit in writing the <br /> revised estimate. <br /> The extent of residual soil contamination did not appear to take into consideration the former <br /> investigation's results; i.e. the 1985 pre-tank removal assessment and the 1986 tank removal. <br /> Subsequently, a summary of the analytical results was submitted. Please note that the samples which <br /> were collected on June 25, 1986: S1, S2, and S3, were not all from stockpiled soil. According to <br /> PHS/EHD records: S1 was collected at 7'9" below ground surface directly beneath the former <br /> underground storage tank; S2 was collected after a limited excavation at 11' below ground surface and <br /> sample S3 from contaminated soil on the roadside. A corrected table should be submitted along with <br /> verification that this information was correctly used during residual soil fate and transport analysis. <br /> Also, a complete summary of all analytical results obtained during groundwater sampling should be <br /> submitted. <br /> Should the revised estimate support your recommendation for closure, a work plan to destroy the <br /> monitoring well and a well destruction permit along with the $89 fee should be submitted. If PHS/EHD <br /> concurs with your request for site closure/certification a well destruction permit will be issued and once <br /> the well is destroyed, closure/certification granted. <br /> If you have any questions, please contact Mary Meays at (209) 468-0337. <br /> Donna Heran, REHS, Director <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> V v�� <br /> Mary Meays, Senior REHS Diane M. Hinson, REHS <br /> Site Mitigation Unit Supervisor <br /> cc: Elizabeth Thayer, CVRWQCB <br /> Mark Smolley, EMCON <br /> A Dig inion of San Joaquin Countv Health Care Services <br />