My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005989
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
Y
>
YOSEMITE
>
1434
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545950
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005989
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/24/2020 2:22:22 AM
Creation date
8/6/2020 10:54:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0005989
RECORD_ID
PR0545950
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003739
FACILITY_NAME
Colonial Energy CE 40134 (DBA Power Mart)
STREET_NUMBER
1434
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
YOSEMITE
STREET_TYPE
Ave
City
Manteca
Zip
95337
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1434 W Yosemite Ave
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
147
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
43 Groundwater Sampling Resulta <br />' The groundwater monitor wells were developed and sampled by Canonie on November 5, 1992 <br /> Groundwater samples were analyzed for TPHg, BTEX, and EDB The only sample with petroleum <br />' hydrocarbons present above the laboratory detection limits during flus event was from well W3 with <br /> 0 55 parts per billion (ppb) of xylenes The groundwater monitor wells were again purged and <br />' sampled by SEA COR on December 2, 1993 The only sample with petroleum hydrocarbons present <br /> above the laboratory detection limits during this event was from well W6 with 0 06 ppb toluene <br />' These concentrations are well below the maximum contaminant levels of 1750 ppb xylenes and 1000 <br /> ppb toluene in A Compilation of,WaterQuality Goals published by the CRWQCB-Central Valley <br />' Region Results of the groundwater analyses are shown in Table 4 <br />' 5.0 REMEDIATIONALTERNATIVES <br />' Laboratory results of groundwater samples collected at the site indicate that remediation of site <br /> groundwater is not an issue Because of this,remedial actions for the site will be limited to the soils <br /> which have been impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons <br />' Remediation alternatives for treatment of hydrocarbon impacted soil at the site were evaluated for <br />' general feasibility and cost effectiveness The remediation alternatives that were studied included <br /> ■ Soil excavation with on-site aeration, land farming, or disposal <br /> ■ Soil vapor extraction <br /> ■ In situ biodegradation <br /> ■ Physical containment or chemical neutralization <br /> 5 1 Soil Excavation <br /> ISoil excavation includes the physical removal of all hydrocarbon impacted soil Subsequent to <br /> excavation and treatment of the soils, the soil can either be backfilled or disposed of at a Class III <br /> sanitary landfill The impacted soil can be treated by simple aeration, landfarming, or be disposed <br /> I UA-1434PARQ SE&COR` <br /> 8 <br /> N00o5-002-0I Mey 31 M% <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.