CORRESPONDENCE_2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Corral Hollow Sanitary Landfill -3- 7 July 2011 San Joaquin County Departme of Public Works California Department of Transportation estimates approximately 1.3 acres of county property and approximately 0.6 acres on the adjacent Caltrans property requires extension of the closure cover. 9. The parties could either remove the waste that is outside the cover or extend the cover. In a letter dated 28 June 2011, the County states that it has reached agreement with Caltrans to participate in a single project to extend the closure cover over the refuse on both properties. Caltrans has reiterated this agreement in a letter dated 29 June 2011. Groundwater Release 10.As discussed above, groundwater monitoring wells MW-5 and MW-8 continue to contain VOCs, including tetrachloroethene ("PCE"), at concentrations over the Public Health Goal of 0.06 tag/L and the Title 27 Water Quality Protection Standard of non-detect. VOCs have been detected in well MW-5 since 1991, and although the number of compounds .reported has decreased since corrective action has been implemented, ten VOC compounds were reported in well MW-5 during the fourth quarter 2010 groundwater monitoring event. 11.In accordance with Title 27, section 20385, Central Valley Water Board staff required the County prepare an Evaluation Monitoring Program ("EMP") work plan to define the nature and extent of the release from the WMUs and to design a corrective action program meeting the requirements of Title 27, section 20430. In a letter dated 11 April 2007, Board staff approved the EMP that the County had submitted. However, the County requested a stay to the EMP in lieu of additional corrective action. The County staffed that LFG was the cause of the continued groundwater impacts and that additional extraction wells installed adjacent to the northeastern property boundary would remediate the impacts. 12.Additional LFG extraction wells were installed in 2008 to abate the detected pollution in wells MW-5 and MW-8. However, since the additional LFG extraction wells have become operational, little effect on groundwater impacts have been observed in these wells. In a 24 June 2010 letter, the County stated that the uncovered refuse identified outside the WMU is a likely contributor to groundwater degradation. The nature and extent of the groundwater plume has not been defined north-northwest and northeast of the landfill site. Re uq latory Considerations 13.Water Code section 13267 states, in part: In conducting an investigation ... the regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or discharging, or who proposed to discharge waste ... shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical and monitoring program reports which the regional board required. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring these reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a