Laserfiche WebLink
• � Page 4 of 5 <br /> www.am <br /> p g liable law.Dissemination or <br /> WARNING:This a-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,16 U.S.C.2510-2521 and contains inform:ion <br /> from Ami Adi,i&Assodates,Inc.,that is rivile ed,confidential and exempt from disdosure under app lease <br /> copying by anyone other than the addressee or address <br /> adiniacgom�is strictly prohibited.If this e-mail is received in error,p <br /> notify the sender immediately,or our office at Mail(a <br /> From: Vicki McCartney [EH] r •Ir •vmccartney2sicehd.com] <br /> Sent:Thursday,January 24, 2013 4:35 PM <br /> To: Daren zumberge; Ami Adini <br /> Cc: Shayan Simantob; Elie Balas; Gus Osterkamp; Gabriele Baader; Nuel Henderson [EH] <br /> Subject: 425 Larch Road in Tracy, CA <br /> Dear Ms. Daren: <br /> As the responsible party for the Frontier Transportation property at 425 Larch Road, Tracy, California, on 23 <br /> January 2013, you requested a discussion with me regarding your site and proposed corrective actions for <br /> the site. Today, I returned your call along with Nuel Henderson, PG. You stated your concern with the pace <br /> of work on your site and utilizing the remaining funds efficiently from the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup <br /> Fund (USTCUF) to complete corrective actions on your site and achieve site closure; you solicited the <br /> opinion of the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department(EHD) on which course of action would <br /> be most effective for this site. <br /> Prior to returning the phone call, EHD personnel reviewed the site for closure consideration to determine if <br /> the site could be closed under the recently'Thated Low Threat Closure Policy(LTCP) of the EHD found that the site does not meet all the LTCP California <br /> criiteriae <br /> Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). <br /> for closure under the policy. The deficiencies noted included the following: <br /> 1. The plume of impacted groundwater is not fully delineated in the down-gradient direction; <br /> 2. Plume length exceeds 250 feet, therefore methyl tertiary-butyl ether(MTBE)concentrations cannot <br /> exceed 1,000 micrograms per liter(pg/L), but in the most recent sampling event dated 18 September <br /> 2012, MTBE concentrations were as high as 7,470 pg/L; <br /> 3. Five down-gradient water supply wells have been identified as potentially being threatened by the <br /> plume of impacted groundwater, the closest being within 1,000 feet of the known down-gradient <br /> extent of the groundwater plume; and <br /> 4. Excess benzene concentrations in soil gas have been identified as a potential health risk through <br /> vapor intrusion. <br /> The SWRCB, through its Five-Year Review, last recommended(October 2011)that the EHD direct active <br /> remediation be implemented on the site to achieve Water Quality Goals in a timely manner. Based on the <br /> last recommendation from the SWRCB and the review of the LTCP criteria,the EHD is of the opinion that <br /> additional remediation of the source area should be implemented as quickly as possible to address the <br /> issues noted above and achieve site closure. <br /> Review of the initial 30-day dual phase extraction (DPE) pilot test shows that the test had positive results; <br /> over 2,000 pounds of contaminants[total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g)]were extracted and <br /> the mass extraction rate declined from over 25(probably of somewhat duper day to es active groundthan 10 s per day. <br /> With an approximately 10-foot vadose zone(p Yeased <br /> extraction) it would intuitively seem that there is a fairly limited contaminant mass stuck(sorbed)to soil to <br /> extract, and extracting over 2,000 pounds with the decline of mass extraction rate noted above suggests to <br /> the EHD that much of the extractable contaminant(through vapor extraction) has been removed. If this is so, <br /> then it would seem that only a limited amount of additional extraction would be needed to reduce the sorbed <br /> mass to the extent practicable;this leads the EHD to the opinion that implementation of the second 30-day <br /> DPE pilot test may be adequate to address the vadose zone sorbed contaminant mass. <br /> Dissolved contaminant concentrations in some wells incrreasof the DPE ed following he initial <br /> more30-dantenselypilot <br /> impacttest, <br /> but <br /> this may be due to the groundwater extraction (GWE) portion <br /> groundwater to the extraction points. GWE is generally not the preferred method for addressing sorbed <br /> contaminant mass in the saturated zone, but as MTBE is the contaminant with excessive dissolved <br /> concentrations and MTBE has little sorption to soil and is one of the most mobile contaminants,the GWE <br /> portion of the DPE may prove to be effective at reducing the concentrations of this contaminant to acceptable <br /> 2/14/2013 <br />