My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
B
>
BROADWAY
>
1905
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0518600
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2018 10:53:10 AM
Creation date
12/7/2018 10:30:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0518600
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0013996
FACILITY_NAME
CROP PRODUCTION SERVICES
STREET_NUMBER
1905
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
BROADWAY
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
14315004
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
1905 N BROADWAY
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
TMorelli
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
David Stavarek, R.G. <br /> June 29, 1998 <br /> Page 2 <br /> P=Ose of thp,Workplan <br /> The purpose of the Workplan is to describe the methodology proposed by Sierra-Pacific for <br /> conducting a health risk assessment(HRA) for the Former PuroGroBrea Facility site. <br /> According to the Workplan, the purpose of the HRA is"to evaluate potential risks to human <br /> health associated with chemical substances that have been detected in on-site soil and in ground <br /> water both on- and off-site" (see comment 2 for Section 5,below). A HRA has been requested <br /> by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) as partial requirement for <br /> evaluating the need for soil and/or groundwater remediation or cleanup of this site. <br /> General Comments <br /> The Workplan is a well-organized document. A number of statements need to be clarified, <br /> though. The comments below are issues and statements based on current practices in health risk <br /> assessment as used by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment(OEHHA). We <br /> would like to see these comments addressed in the final HRA prepared by Sierra-Pacific rather <br /> than in a new draft of the Workplan. In the text,the acronym"Cal-EPA" is used;the correct <br /> acronym is Cal/EPA. <br /> SECTION 4.0 CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL(CS4 <br /> 1. Current use and zoning of land. According to page 13, the authors state that". . . for the <br /> purposes of the CSM and HRA, current on-site land use is characterized as a standard <br /> `industrial/commercial' facility,which will continue as such for 30 years into the future <br /> (deterministic HRA)." The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) Guidance Manual <br /> (page 2-17), however,requires the use of a residential use of the land, regardless of the <br /> current use and zoning of the site. OEHHA supports this guidance unless there is a deed <br /> restriction placed on the use of this land. The probabilistic approach,however,may use other <br /> exposure scenarios in addition to the residential. <br /> 2. Surface soil and contaminant levels. According to Section 4.2,"surface soils are considered <br /> to include only the top three feet of soil" (page 14). PEA Guidance requires that"The <br /> sampling strategy should ensure that locations which would likely contain the highest <br /> contaminant concentrations will be sampled"and"The maximum depth of sampling will <br /> depend on the potential for migration of the contaminants through soil." (page 2-9). For this <br /> purpose, PEA Guidance incorporates the "swimming pool construction" scenario in the <br /> residential use of land. As a result,PEA Guidance implicitly assumes a depth of up to <br /> 10 feet as "surface soil" containing the maximum observed concentration of contaminant. It <br /> is recommended that the 0-3 ft depth proposed in the Workplan be extended to 10 ft in the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.