My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO_1991-1997
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
9069
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440001
>
COMPLIANCE INFO_1991-1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/7/2021 10:53:56 AM
Creation date
7/3/2020 10:39:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
1991-1997
RECORD_ID
PR0440001
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004514
FACILITY_NAME
AUSTIN ROAD/ FORWARD LANDFILL
STREET_NUMBER
9069
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95215
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
9069 S AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sfrench
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4433_PR0440001_9069 S AUSTIN_1991-1996.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
700
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
r] <br />Austin Road Landfill Is <br />19 <br />April 17, 1996 <br />462. Could VOCs from the landfill be present in more than one underground aquifer? What <br />explanation does the City give for the VOCs found in the residential wells east of Austin Road?" <br />Yes, VOCs have been found in the lower aquifer at Austin Road as recently as October 1995. <br />Xylene and PCE were found in deep monitoring well MW -6. The City's position is that there <br />plume has not reached the east side of Austin Road. <br />"3. - Can a water sample from MW -14 showing nondetectable constituents of concern be valid <br />evidence the VOC's from the landfill did not cause contamination in the State's agricultural <br />well? Per Clark Well, Inc., the State's agricultural well is 270 feet deep. Are the monitoring <br />wells the same depth?" A single sample of water from MW -14 is not sufficient to convince us <br />that the plume of VOCs in groundwater does not extend beyond well MW -14. During drilling <br />of MW -14, water was encountered at a depth of 77 feet. The monitoring well was completed to a <br />depth of 106 feet, or 29 feet below the water table. Since the agricultural well is substantially <br />deeper than this, it is possible that the plume has bypassed well No. 14. <br />"4. Could the RWQCB require that the City re -test the State's agricultural well and provide a copy <br />of the analysis to OREDS? Since the State's water sample (taken from the well in 1994 through <br />a chain of custody) tested for VOCs and the City questioned the methodology used to conduct the <br />analysis of this sample, it seems only appropriate the City re -test the well. Ya new sampling <br />show no VOCs in the State's well, would this be sufficient evidence from the RWQCB to <br />conclude the contamination from the landfill has not reached SSL 357-3?" We did ask the City <br />of Stockton to test the State's agricultural well, however the City declined due to the oil in the <br />well. As an alternative, the City proposed to install well MW -14, which is between the State's <br />agricultural well and the known plume area. We accepted the City's proposal and the City <br />incurred the expense of installing and sampling an additional monitoring well. With your <br />concurrence we will sample the State's agricultural well to look for pollutants. <br />Our field staff will contact you in the near future to arrange access to sample the CYA wells. If you <br />have any questions, please call me at (916) 255-3140. <br />WILLIAM J. MARSHALL, Chief <br />Waste Discharge to Land Unit <br />NMI <br />cc: Stephen Chen, City of Stockton Department of Public Works, Stockton <br />iS, an Joaquin County Public Health Services, Stockton <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.