My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_1982-1983
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
9999
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440005
>
CORRESPONDENCE_1982-1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/17/2023 4:12:38 PM
Creation date
10/6/2022 3:15:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
1982-1983
RECORD_ID
PR0440005
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004516
FACILITY_NAME
FORWARD DISPOSAL SITE
STREET_NUMBER
9999
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
20106001-3, 5
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
9999 AUSTIN RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\cfield
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.
/
626
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
10-8 can also be written as follows: 1/100,000,000, and the <br /> permeability can be verbalized as follows: One-one hundred millionth <br /> of a centimeter per second. Calculated in English units to a yearly <br /> basis, it turns out to be about .12 inch per year. To further clar- <br /> ify, it means that if one had a pond of water from which there was no <br /> surface evaporation, and if that pond stood for one year, the level <br /> of water would be lowered .12 inches due to seepage. Of course, this <br /> is a very small amount of seepage, and some authorities say that 10-8 <br /> cm/sec. is the equivalent of impermeable. The fact that this value <br /> was selected by the Regional Board (as opposed to staff) shows that <br /> the Regional Board was deeply concerned that these ponds not leak <br /> pollutants into the groundwater system. <br /> A memo dited April 18, 1980, from Jim Parsons, Legal and Tech- <br /> nical Services Division of the State Board to Frank McDermott of the <br /> Regional Board staff discusses the ponds and reports the results of <br /> permeability tests. A copy is attached as Appendix C. in refer- <br /> ring to the permeability tests, it says, "Permeability test results <br /> were 1X10-7, 3x10-6, and 8x10-6 cmlsec." (One pond was not tested, <br /> and this anomaly was not explained). These permeabilities are, respect-, <br /> ively, ten, three hundred, and eight hundred times as leaky as the <br /> Regional Board's Discharge Requirements. Indeed, Mr. Parsons' con- <br /> clusions include a statement that two of the three ponds were "Exces- <br /> ively permeable". Nevertheless, he goes on to say, "on the other <br /> hand, the relatively low degree of hazard associated with the dril- <br /> ling muds and brines going into the site and the substantial thick- <br /> ness of clay present make the above problems not serious enough to <br /> justify your requiring their correction." (emphasis added) <br /> In other words, Mr. Jim Parsons, as a staff member of the State <br /> Board, took it upon himself to negate the order of the Regional <br /> Board and to allow as much as 800 times the pollution envisioned by <br /> the Regional Board.. Mr. Parsons excuses'this remarkable action by <br /> saying that a "relatively low degree of hazard" is associated with <br /> the drilling muds and brines going into the site. RAI has made cal- <br /> culations to quantify the degree of hazard, and find that the degree <br /> of hazard is anything but low. The results of the calculations are as <br /> follows: <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.