|
DRAFT CLEANUP AND ABATEMENT ORDER R5-2012-XXXX -2-
<br /> RALPH LEE WHITE AND PETER BUI
<br /> 2122 SOUTH AIRPORT WAY,SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
<br /> 5. When all of the wells were last sampled in April 2008, nine of the eleven monitoring wells
<br /> were impacted by petroleum hydrocarbons, with maximum concentrations for TPHg,
<br /> 45,000 micrograms per Liter (ug/L); benzene, 610 ug/L, toluene, 3,100 ug/L;
<br /> ethylbenzene, 1,000 ug/L; xylenes, 2,860 ug/L; MTBE, 16,000 ug/L; tertiary amyl methyl
<br /> ether (TAME), 11 ug/L; di-isopropyl ether, 2.9 ug/L; and 1, 2-dichlorethane (1,2-DCA),
<br /> 31 ug/L. A December 2008 workplan to investigate the offsite groundwater plume was not
<br /> implemented. In December 2011 only MW-3 was sampled due to lack of funding, with
<br /> TPHg, 77,000 ug/L; benzene, 150 ug/L; toluene, 43 ug/L; ethylb zene, 6,000 ug/L;
<br /> xylenes, 13,020 ug/L; MTBE, 36,000 ug/L, TAME, 3.8 ug/L; a -DCA, 2.1 ug/L. To
<br /> date, the groundwater plume has not been defined to the e the property in the
<br /> residential neighborhood, a sensitive receptor survey ha en completed; nor has a
<br /> site conceptual model been submitted.
<br /> 6. The Site does not meet the State Water Resourc ntrol Board Board) Low
<br /> Threat Closure Policy (LTCP) due to the follo
<br /> • Does Not Meet LTCP General Crite, Ground Assessmen mplete-
<br /> Aerial Extent of Contamination Not De b. eulogy Not Ade ately
<br /> Defined; c. Potential Receptors Not Iden . Soil Vapor Not Evaluated.
<br /> • Does Not Meet any of the ritena LT oundwater: a. Plume Length
<br /> Unknown, b. MTBE > 3'000 L, nce to st Supply Well Unknown.
<br /> • Does Not Meet a f the Spe Crit etr um Vapor Intrusion to
<br /> Indoor Air: a. s Same in nuation Zone >100 mg/kg,
<br /> c. Benzene oun r >1 , d. Soil Gas Concentrations for Benzene,
<br /> Ethylben and Nap len e U wn.
<br /> 7. The Dischargers ined ' le co nce with SJCEHD directives until
<br /> December 2008, w r numerous letters to the Dischargers and
<br /> a me 201 SJCEHD s ich did not result in resumption of work, the
<br /> SJ re ca the Central Valley Water Board in May 2011.
<br /> 8. al Board staff ed t chargers by registered letters of the change in lead
<br /> age June 2011, ade eral attempts to contact and meet with the Dischargers
<br /> includ nd delivery e letters in August 2011. No contact was made with Regional
<br /> Board st til Mr. Bui' orney contacted staff in October 2011. Regional Board staff
<br /> met with th rney representative for Mr. Bui in November 2011, and one result of
<br /> the meeting ndwater sampling of one of the site's monitoring wells in
<br /> December 2G11. ui's attorney stated that they were attempting to get the State Water
<br /> Resources Control oard UST Cleanup Fund (Fund) claim for the Site transferred from Mr.
<br /> White to Mr. Bui, to provide funding for the work. One email status report, submitted in
<br /> January 2012, stated Mr. White was not responding to their requests to transfer the Fund
<br /> claim. Regional Board staff made additional unsuccessful attempts to contact the
<br /> Dischargers in January 2012 and May 2012.
<br />
|