Laserfiche WebLink
ql� - <br /> STATE OF CAUFORNIA PETE WILSON,Governor <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARDop c� <br /> 66", <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 ROUTIER ROAD, SUITE A <br /> Sacramento,CA 95827-3098 <br /> PHONE: (916)361-5600 <br /> FAX (916)361-5686 N11 101 V 0 8? <br /> r , <br /> 5 November 1991 <br /> Mr. Michael Miller <br /> Department of Public Works <br /> City of Stockton, City Hail <br /> 425 North El Dorado Street <br /> Stockton, CA 95202-1997 <br /> ADD177ONAL CONCERNS ABOUT TRE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN(01n AUSTIN ROAD LANDFILL, <br /> STOCKTON, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY(CASE#2148) <br /> In the City of Stockton's (City) 30 September 1991 letter to our office,you disagreed with our requirement to include <br /> pH, electrical conductivity(EC), total dissolved solids (TDS) to the fist of constituents of concerns. Article 10 of <br /> Chapter 15, Tide 23 California Code of Regulations states that, "consfiatenu of concem'means any waste constituents, <br /> reaction products, and hazardous constituents that are reasonably expected to be in or derived from waste contained in a <br /> waste management unit. EC, TDS, and pH are all reasonable constituents of concerns for a landfill. <br /> According to data submitted, EC and TDS are present in the ground water above water quality objectives and <br /> indicate a threat to further degrade the ground water beneath the site. Hence, the elevated levels of EC and TDS in <br /> well MW-3 and trace levels of VOCs in well MW-5 indicates a release of waste from the waste management unit and <br /> must be investigated further to verify the release. <br /> The CAP does not discuss the treatability of the condensate return from Pacific Energy and the compatibility of the <br /> condensate return with the proposed treatment methods and disposal options. In previous meetings with EMCON, <br /> the Integrated Waste Management Board, and our office, the City stated that once the new ground water treatment <br /> plant was installed, the condensate return would be discharged to the new treatment plant. It is not evident that the <br /> City intends to address the treatability of the condensate return or identify the associated cost (capital and O&M) <br /> with treating this discharge. The treatability studies to be submitted in the future must demonstrate that the <br /> treatment methodology selected will treat the discharge of condensate return. <br /> If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 361-5737. <br /> .0 <br /> at\ <br /> ROBERT 0AE! <br /> Project Engineer <br /> RAE <br /> cc: Mr. Tim Crist, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento <br /> /Mr. Ed Padilla, San Joaquin County Public Health Services, Stockton <br /> Mr. Mark Thomas, Emcon Associates, Sacramento <br />