Laserfiche WebLink
Nft000 ..+1 <br /> tt HEA f Wright <br /> July 29, 1996 ~ 3 r�#)Vj r r- Environmental <br /> Services, Inc. <br /> 96 AUG' -? AM 10: 52 <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Mr. Steve. Sasson <br /> Public Health Services, Environmental Health <br /> 304 E. Weber <br /> Stockton, CA 95201 <br /> RE: 60 E. 10th Street M&M Automotive (Site Code 2554) <br /> Dear Mr. Sasson: <br /> Enclosed please find the workplan for the source removal which our staff has discussed with you. <br /> As you know, we have defined the extent of the soil contamination and groundwater plume at the <br /> above referenced site. Wright Environmental Services, Inc. (Wright) and our client Mr. Larry <br /> McLean, the property owner, wish to attain closure for this site and acknowledge that the RWQCB <br /> is ultimately the arbiter for site closure. <br /> We understand pursuant to telephone conversation that the County of San Joaquin Public Health <br /> Services Environmental Health Division(PHS-EHD) is currently awaiting the modified guidance <br /> from the Regional Water Control Board regarding site assessment and cleanup work prior to <br /> issuing written requirements to responsible parties in the LOP Program. However, discussions <br /> with your office indicate that source removal is appropriate at this time for sites such as this which <br /> have vadose zone sources which apparently are contributing to groundwater contamination, and <br /> that source removal could result in lower overall remediation costs. Lower overall costs are <br /> achieved by shortening the monitoring period and reducing the remediation costs for an expanding <br /> plume which could result from allowing sources to remain and spread. We also understand that <br /> the State Water Resources Control Board, Underground Storage Cleanup Fund (UST FUND) <br /> activities may be modified depending upon pending RWQCB input. <br /> Source removal is consistent with current and anticipated guidance from RWQCB for site work <br /> and is also a reimbursable expense through the UST Fund. The owner has indicated that he <br /> wishes to move forward with source removal to stop the progression of groundwater <br /> contamination, lower his costs for remediation and monitoring and move forward with attaining <br /> site closure as a "low risk site" once monitoring shows the plume to be stable and declining (our <br /> expectation once source removal is complete). Wright envisions a limited source area excavation to <br /> remove contaminated soil. Groundwater removal would be limited to that quantity necessary to <br /> remove any floating product and to enable proper geotecnical backfill compaction on a base within <br /> groundwater occurrance. We welcome any comment from PHS-EHD upon the enclosed workplan <br /> which addresses measures discussed with PHS-EHD and the property owner. We will contact <br /> your office regarding upcoming monitoring and any other activity, as well as permits for the <br /> proposed monitoring well and source removal. <br /> If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> ohn Lynch <br /> President <br /> enclosures <br /> 4220 Commercial Dr. #5 - Tracy, California 95376 tip(209) 833-0758 - Fax(209) 832-5152 <br />