Laserfiche WebLink
LP 'T,cc/n <br /> DRAFT <br /> On June 18 , 1992 a meeting was held at the San Joaquin County <br /> Public Health Services, Environmental Health Division (PHS/EHD) <br /> Office to discuss Exxon's site at 4444 N. Pershing, Stockton and <br /> Shell 's site at 4445 N. Pershing, Stockton. <br /> The following people attended the meeting: <br /> Daniel Kirk - Shell Oil Company <br /> Brian Garber - Aegis Environmental, Inc. <br /> Marla Guensler - Exxon Company, USA <br /> Terry Windsor - E.A. Engineering, Science, <br /> & Technology <br /> Douglas Oram - E.A. Engineering, Science, <br /> & Technology <br /> Elizabeth Thayer - Central Valley Regional <br /> Water Quality Control Board <br /> (CVRWQCB) <br /> Margaret Lagorio - PHS/EHD <br /> Harlin Knoll - PHS/EHD <br /> Steven Schneider - PHS/EHD <br /> Michael Collins - PHS/EHD <br /> The purpose of the meeting was to discuss Exxon' s groundwater <br /> injection proposal which would create a hydraulic barrier and <br /> limit the area of influence of their groundwater extraction <br /> system in the up-gradient direction. Information and concerns <br /> discussed were: <br /> -In February 1988 Exxon's monitoring well (MW) 8 was <br /> installed in the sidewalk on the west side of Pershing <br /> Avenue. The soil sample collected below first water, 28 <br /> feet below ground surface (bgs) , evidenced TPH as gasoline <br /> at 3200 ppm. Groundwater samples from MW 8 obtained April <br /> 1988 through May 1991 evidenced groundwater contamination. <br /> -Soil Sample results from Exxon's MW 7, injection well <br /> (IW) 1, piezometer (P) 1 and P 2 (collected 25 feet to 30 <br /> feet bgs) were significantly lower than the results from <br /> MW 8 . <br /> -Groundwater sample results from Exxon' s MW 1, MW 4 , MW 7, <br /> IW 1, P 1, and P 2 have been consistently lower than the <br /> groundwater sample results from MW 8 . <br />