Laserfiche WebLink
STAAL <br /> ADDNED R E CE1 V ED <br /> DUNNE JUL 2 6 1993 <br /> C ' I fa a ts <br /> flu g To., NJ compaxy. WILSON.SONSWI. <br /> GOOI)RfCH&ROSATI <br /> Color Spot, Inc. July 22, 1993. <br /> P..0..B. 5011. Reference: M98.1658H <br /> i�ch'tniond, .Uifbrnia 9490.5 <br /> Attention-; W.Kevin Adams <br /> Exectifive.Vice President <br /> Clarification and Update of Information Presente4:in the.StaaL. Gardner:.&Dunne, <br /> .Inc, Letter-Report Ti led Environmental Services. Underground &q.take flank <br /> Removal, Color Spot Ines Lodi, California Facility Dated Marc .28, 1989. <br /> Dear 1tilr Adams:. <br /> In response to our recent discussions,. thi­sletter is to: clarify an issue pertaining to Staal, <br /> Ga—rdAdt*Dunne, Inc.'s (SGD)initial letter-report concerning Color Spot,Inc.'s Lodi facility. SGD <br /> feels that based on information collected over the past four years a statement conveyed in our initial <br /> ,report pertaining to the removal and 0 1 ermanent abandonment of a 4,000-gallon-capacity underground <br /> storage tank (UST) requires additional comment. <br /> Our letter-report, dated March 28, 1989, documents the removal and abandonment of the <br /> 4,000-gallon-capacity UST which was utilized for the storage of diesel fuel. SGD observed the field <br /> activities required for the removal of the UST in late February and early March 1999. Following <br /> the removal of the UST, SGD observed the collection of 2 verification soil samples for chemical <br /> analysis from the resultant UST excavation. These soil samples were collected by a representative <br /> of a contracted chemical analytical laboratory (Canonie Environmental Services Corporation),which <br /> was subcontracted to Color Spot, Int.'s UST removal contractor (Jim, Thorpe Coil j. The samples <br /> were collected in the presence of both. SGD and a representati":of San Joaquin County Public <br /> Ilealth Services, Environmental Rd".Division. <br /> Because the verification samples were collected by a subcontracted laboratory, SGD had no <br /> control over the laboratory analytical program,including the selection of appropriate detection limits: <br /> Asa:resulti.the detection limits utilized by Canonie Environmental Services:.Corporation (Canonie). <br /> limitsof06.25' <br /> for benzene.was in.SGD!.i:opinion not:zppropriate. Canonie u �lized.b.enzene detection. ....'. <br /> parts per million(Ppm)and0.025 ppm.which were significantly iftextess.of the-op-plied actionlevel <br /> f6r. benzene e time of the UST <br /> ST :r Vil o .4 out <br /> of .64 0 ppM Theref6re, at the erno.. program, I was <br /> professional. :opinion that insufficientdata existed to conclude that.benzene concentrations did not <br /> i <br /> exist n.the soils:surrounding.the.UST... As a result, SGD inferred in=r March 28, 1W document <br /> that..possibly. .: benzene may .have .been:present in the soils adjacent to the. former UST..: <br /> 5855:049# .Park Driive I Ventura, California 93003-76772 805/650-7000. Fax-,M51.650-7010 <br />