Laserfiche WebLink
San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department olREcroR <br /> Donna Heran,REHS <br /> 600 East Main Street <br /> PROGRAM COORDINATORS <br /> Stockton, California 95202-3029 <br /> Robert McClellon, REHS <br /> Jeff Carruesco,REHS, RDI <br /> ^� Kasey Foley, REHS <br /> 0 -- _ .a�P Website: www.sjgov.org/ehd Linda Turkatte, REHS <br /> �` °¢ Phone: (209)468-3420 <br /> Fax: (209) 464-0138 <br /> December 13, 2010 <br /> Mr. Allen Fetters <br /> Ripon Farm Service Incorporated <br /> 3660 Arrowhead Court <br /> Stockton, California 95219 <br /> Subject:Ripon Farm Service Incorporated <br /> 932 South Highway 99 (Formerly 22871 South Highway 99) <br /> Ripon, California 95366 <br /> Dear Mr. Fetters: <br /> The San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department (EHD) has given significant <br /> consideration to evaluating the soil gas results for soil vapor samples VP-1, VP-2, and VP-3 <br /> collected in March 2009 to determine the risk to human health and the environment <br /> associated with the data from the soil gas investigation. <br /> Of concern is the reporting of total petroleum hydrocarbons quantified as diesel (TPH-d) as <br /> `not detected` at a reporting limit of 20,000 micrograms per cubic meter (pg/m3) for all three <br /> soil gas samples. The EHD does not believe that the samples were properly collected in the <br /> field to be analyzed for TPH-d, nor were the soil gas samples analyzed for TPH-d by method <br /> TO-17, an inconsistency with the approved work plan (EHD letter dated 27 August 2008). To <br /> ascertain that the reported data are reliable, by letter dated 02 July 2010, the EHD requested <br /> the submittal of the TPH-d initial calibration curve, continuing calibration standards, method <br /> blanks, and quality assurance/quality control samples [laboratory control sample/laboratory <br /> control sample duplicate (LCSILCSD) and matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MSIMSD)] <br /> associated with the three soil gas samples. By e-mail dated 31 July 2010, your consulting <br /> firm, Advanced GeoEnviron mental, Inc. (AGE), provided the following response: "Additional <br /> chromatograms for TPH-d QA/QC for EPA method 8260 are not available, as the GCMS <br /> method did not use a TPH-d standard for evaluation. A notation on the base of the analysis, <br /> states TPH-d was performed by GUMS analysis for TPH-d range compounds and the <br /> detection limit is 20,000 micrograms per cubic meter." Based on this information, the EHD <br /> denies the results submitted for TPH-d and directs that you resample and collect the three soil <br /> gas samples on solid adsorbent TO-17 tubes for analysis of TPH-d by method TO-17, as was <br /> proposed in the work plan dated 18 July 2008, and approved by the EHD by letter dated 27 <br /> August 2008. <br /> Please submit to the EHD a boring permit application along with the required $488 <br /> permitlthree-hour-inspection fee and a completed Master File Record (MFR) form. Notify the <br />