Laserfiche WebLink
J'SLE 1 -CHECKLIST OF REQUIRED DATA fi <br /> FOR NO FURT�.� ACTION REQUESTS AT UNDERGROUND,NK SITES <br /> Site Name and Location: USA Petroleum, 2500 W. Lodi Ave., Lodi, San Joaquin County(Case 390096) <br /> VDistance to production wells for municipal, domestic, A 2008 well survey reported no supply wells and 2 domestic <br /> culture, industry and other uses within 2000 feet of the site. wells within 2000'of the site, one at 1000'south,and one at <br /> 1000'northeast. <br /> Y 2. Site maps, to scale, of area impacted showing locations Three 12,000-gallon gasoline USTs and associa#ed piping <br /> of any former and existing tank systems, excavation were removed and replaced 10/97. TPHg, benzene, toluene, I <br /> contours and sample locations, boring and monitoring well ethylbenzene,xylenes, and MTBE were detected in soil r <br /> elevation contours, gradients, and nearby surface waters, beneath the USTs. k <br /> buildings, streets, and subsurface utilities; <br /> ::Y1 3. Figures depicting lithology(cross section), treatment Site lithology consists of clay, silt, and sand to <br /> system diagrams; 60 feet, the total depth investigated. <br /> Y 4. Stockpiled soil remaining on-site or off-site disposal(quantity); Approximately 500 cubic yards bf excavated soll was <br /> transported to Forward Landfill in Manteca. <br /> y 5. Monitoring wells remaining on-site, fate; Eleven monitoring wells(MW-1 through MW-4, MW-6 through MW-10, S-1, r <br /> and S-2)and two remediation wells(VW-1 and AS-1)remaining on-site will <br /> be pMerly abandoned. <br /> Yj <br /> Depth to groundwater varied from 35 to 48 feet below ground surface(bgs). <br /> 6. Tabulated results of all groundwater <br /> elevations and depths to water The groundwater gradient varied from 0.001 to 0.003. The downgradient <br /> groundwater flow direction varied from south to southeast. <br /> - 7.---Tabala7ed`results of-all'sarnpling:--Maximum confirmation soil-concentrations-(10/97-)-were-TPHg;-8,400-mg/kg;-- -- <br /> and analyses: benzene, 15 mg/kg;toluene, 150 mg/kg;ethylbenzene, 100 mg/kg;xylenes, <br /> 750 mg/kg, and MTBE, 23 mg/kg. In 6106,soil boring after results(post <br /> Detection limits for confirmation remediation)were ND. Maximum groundwater monitoring concentrations(6/99) <br /> sampling were TPHg, 15,000 ug/L;benzene, 120 ug/L;ethylbenzene, 270 ug/L;xylenes, <br /> 1,200 ug/L;and MTBE; 15,000 Erg/L. In 5/08,groundwater monitoring i <br /> []Y Lead�analyses concentrations were ND. v <br /> ETLF8. Concentration contours of contaminants found and those remaining in soil and The extent of the identified <br /> groundwater, and both on-site and off-site: contamination shown in applicable <br /> reports. <br /> Y❑Lateral and Y❑Vertical extent of soil contamination <br /> Latera!and Vertical extent of groundwater contamination <br /> 9, Zone of influence calculated and assumptions used for subsurface remediation Over-excavation, SVE/AS, and dual <br /> system and the zone of capture attained for the soil and groundwater remediation phase extraction(DPE) were the <br /> system; required engineered remediation. <br /> 10.Reports/information ❑Y Unauthorized Release Form ❑y QMRs(38 from 12198 to 7108) I <br /> Well and boring logs rV_j PAR � Other;No Further Action Request 8/08 <br /> FRP <br /> Y 1 11,Best Available Technology(BAT) used or an explanation for not using BAT; Removal of USTs, aver-excavation, <br /> SVE/AS, DPE,and natural attenuation. <br /> 2. Reasons whybackground wads unattainable usingBAT, Limited soil contamination remains on-site. <br /> ii-113.Mass balance calculation of substance treated versus that The consultant did not estimate contamination treated <br /> and contamination remaining in soil. <br /> remainin ; <br />- - r after -in. <br /> Y "14. A'ssurirptioFms;parameters;calcatations�and•modelused rn. Ao-sor!-vapor-contamma#ron-was-was -detected _ _ -- i <br /> risk assessments, and fate and transport modeling; 2006 and after DPE in 2008. The site is an active service ! <br /> station. <br /> Y 15. Rationale why conditions remaining at site will not adversely Soil contamination is limited in extent and not leaching to <br /> impact water quality, health, or other beneficial uses;and groundwater. Results of 38 quarters of groundwater <br /> monitoring show a decreasing trend in concentrations to <br /> ND. <br /> By: JLe Comments: Three 12,000-gallon gasoline USTs and associated piping were removed and replaced 10/97. <br /> Sa Maximum confirmation soil concentrations(10/97) were TPHg, 8,400 mg/kg;benzene, 15 mg/kg;toluene, <br /> Date: 150 mg/kg;ethylbenzene, 100 mg/kg;xylenes, 750 mg/kg, and MTBE, 23 mg/kg. In 6106,soil boring after <br /> 12/1812008 results(post remediation)were ND. Maximum groundwater monitoring concentrations(6199)were TPHg, <br /> 15,000 ug/L;benzene, 120 ug/L;ethylbenzene, 270 ug/L;xylenes, 1,200 ug/L;and MTBE; 15,000 Erg/L. In 5/08, <br /> groundwater monitoring concentrations were ND. Based upon 38 quarters of declining groundwater <br /> concentrations to NO,no reported threat from vapor intrusion,no anticipated threats to sensitive receptors, <br /> and the limited extent of contamination present in soil,Regional Board staff concur with San Joaquin County's <br /> Closure Recommendation. <br /> I` <br /> f <br /> �i: <br />