SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

.00 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY Unit Supervisors Third Floor Carl Sorgman,R.E.II. . Donna K.Heran,R.E.H.s. 304 East Weber Avenue, N;like Huggins,R.E.H.S.,R.D.I. Director Douglas W.Wilson,R.E.I-i.S. At Olsen,It.E.H.S. Stockton, California 95202-2705 . b Telephone: (209) 468-3420 \sargarct Lagorio,R.E.H.s. • �. .,, .`P Prn rmn Manager' Robert McClellon,R.E.H.S. 9C1FORr� Laurie A.Cotuila,Iz.E.H.S. Fax; 209 464-0138 ( ) Mark Barcellos,R.£.H.S. program Manager JAN THOMPSON JJ®V 20141 WILBUR ELLIS COMPANY P O BOX 1286 FRESNO CA 93715 E CODE: 507797 RE: H&H Engineering and Construction Facility SITE 212 Industrial Drive RO: Stockton, CA 95206 On November 15, 2004,Vicki McCartney of San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department(EHD) discussed the proposals submitted in Work Plan for additional Subsurface Investigation prepared by Ground Zero Analysis,Inc. (Ground Zero)during a telephone conversation with Jan Thompson of Wilbur Ellis Company. In the work plan Ground Zero proposes to advance six borings to approximately 40 feet below surface grade (bsg), and one boring to approximately 10 feet bsg to further delineate the lateral extent of soil and groundwater contamination. By letter dated October 4, 2004,EHD recommended that*he two borings proposed to be advanced to approximately 40 feet bsg along the northeastern side of the property near the fence, instead be advanced to approximately 50 feet bsg and converted into monitoring wells to assess the down- gradient groundwater contamination. Jan Thompson explained that because soil lithology at the above-referenced site consists mainly of"tight clay" and"contamination moves through small lenses of sand",the two borings should be advanced as originally proposed, and the results from lithologic identification and soil and groundwater analyses collected from the borings be used to determine where best to install one monitoring well to monitor the down-gradient groundwater contamination. EHD agrees with Jan Thompson that the two borings should be advanced as originally proposed in the work plan;however,because a sand layer was encountered at 50 feet bsg in soil borings B2 and B3,EHD believes the borings should be advanced to a depth of 50 feet instead of 40 feet. EHD did not approve the proposed advancement of two borings to approximately 40 feet bsg along the southwestern side of the property. EHD noted that additional data were needed to support the advancement of these two borings. Jan Thompson explained that by advancing the two boring along the southwestern side would complete the lateral investigation and requested that EHD reconsider the advancement of these two borings. EHD agrees with Jan Thompson that the two borings should be advanced to complete the lateral assessment as originally proposed in the work plan; however, EHD recommends that these borings also be advanced to a total depth of 50 feet instead of 40 feet.