My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 3
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
L
>
LARCH
>
425
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0541913
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2020 5:53:25 PM
Creation date
2/13/2020 11:52:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 3
RECORD_ID
PR0541913
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0024043
FACILITY_NAME
FRONTIER TRANSPORTATION FACILITY
STREET_NUMBER
425
STREET_NAME
LARCH
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95304
APN
21220009
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
425 LARCH RD
P_LOCATION
03
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
244
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• Page 1 of 2 <br /> Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> From: Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 4:35 PM <br /> To: Daren Zumberge; 'Ami Adini' <br /> Cc: Shayan Simantob; Elie Bales; '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 <br /> 23 January 2013, you requested a discussion with me regarding your site and proposed corrective <br /> actions for the site. Today, I returned your call along with Nuel Henderson, PG. You stated your concern <br /> with the pace of work on your site and utilizing the remaining funds efficiently from the Underground <br /> Storage Tank Cleanup Fund (USTCUF)to complete corrective actions on your site and achieve site <br /> closure; you solicited the opinion of the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department(EHD) on <br /> which course of action would be most effective for this site. <br /> Prior to returning the phone call, EHD personnel reviewed the site for closure consideration to determine <br /> if the site could be closed under the recently adopted Low Threat Closure Policy (LTCP)of the California <br /> State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The EHD found that the site does not meet all the <br /> LTCP criteria 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(Ng/L), but in the most recent sampling event dated 18 <br /> September 2012, MTBE concentrations were as high as 7,470 Ng/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 <br /> itivea sulresults; <br /> over 2,000 pounds of contaminants[total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g)]were <br /> and the mass extraction rate declined from over 250 pounds of TPH-g per day to less than 10 pounds per <br /> day. With an approximately 10-foot vadose zone (probably increased somewhat during active <br /> groundwater extraction) it would intuitively seem that there is a fairly limited contaminant mass stuck <br /> (sorbed)to soil to extract, and extracting over 2,000 pounds with the decline of mass extraction rate noted <br /> above suggests to the EHD that much of the extractable contaminant(through vapor extraction) has been <br /> removed. If this is so, then it would seem that only a limited amount of additional extraction would be <br /> needed to reduce the sorbed mass to the extent practicable; this leads the EHD to the opinion that <br /> implementation of the second 30-day DPE pilot test may be adequate to address the vadose zone sorbed <br /> contaminant mass. <br /> Dissolved contaminant concentrations in some wells increased following the initial 30-day DPE pilot test, <br /> but this may be due to the groundwater extraction (GWE) portion of the DPE drawing more intensely <br /> impacted groundwater to the extraction points. GWE is generally not the preferred method for addressing <br /> sorbed contaminant mass in the saturated zone, but as MTBE is the contaminant with excessive <br /> dissolved concentrations and MTBE has little sorption to soil and is one of the most mobile contaminants, <br /> the GWE portion of the DPE may prove to be effective at reducing the concentrations of this contaminant <br /> 1/25/2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.