Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> PUBLIC 14EALTH SER CES QU, <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISIiON ' H; , <br /> Ernest M. Fujimoto, M. D., M.P.H., Acting Health Officer . •' _. <br /> 304 East Weber Avenue, Third Floor Stockton, CA 95202 ; �---� e �� .o.a;;�� <br /> 2091468-3420 =, a <br /> i <br /> JOHN STROH i ~`= '� ""- <br /> SAN JOAQUIN MOSQUITO ABATEMENT DISTRICT <br /> 7759 SOUTH AIRPORT WAY <br /> STOCKTON CA 95206 i <br /> Re: San Joaquin Mosquito Abatement District Site Code: 1849 <br /> 200 North Beckman,Lodi CA 95240 <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services,Environmental Health Division (PHSIEHD)las completed review of the"1996 Soil <br /> and Groundwater Sampling Report"dated January 1996 and prepared by Weston. <br /> j <br /> The report included the results of the soil samples collected during the October 25, 1996finstallation of MW5 and the subsequent <br /> groundwater samples. Significant soil contamination by petroleum hydrocarbons was noted up to 2,100 ppm TPH-gas at 25 feet <br /> below ground surface. The report included a recommendation that because grotindwateri'had not been impacted that the site be <br /> f closed with no further action. <br /> i <br /> In order to demonstrate that the site is a low-risk site,requiring no further action,please submit a closure report as outlined in the f <br /> Tri-Regional Guidelines Appendix B dated March 1, 1994 entitled Requests for Closure. The report should include a summary <br /> of all soil and groundwater analytical results with the dates of collection noted,boring logs, waste disposition,and a list of all ' <br /> reports prepared to date for the site. The report should dearly explain why the Registered Professional believes that the site <br /> presents a low risk to water quality,given the considerable remaining soil con tamination.'iThe description should include a <br /> discussion of the factors used to form the conclusion. Since the relative risk to water quality is a funcciion of the magnitude of the <br /> impact that the contaminants may have on water quality,the following factors must be included in the discussion: <br /> 1. The total mass and distribution of the specific contaminants in the vadase zoned saturated zone and in groundwater. <br /> ' 2. The potential fate of the contaminants and if groundwater is expected to be affected,the depth and distance that the <br /> plume will extend before the contaminants cannot be detected in grouri�water. <br /> 3. Show all calculations and identify any assumptions which may have been made due to the lack of available site specific <br /> data. I a <br /> 4. The rational for all assumptions made in the discussion and calculations. E i <br /> 5. A list of the sources of information used in the discussion. <br /> t I. <br /> Once the closure report has been submitted to both PHSIEHD and the Central Vai�lley Regional Water Quality Control Board,the <br /> site will be considered for issuance of a no further action letter. Please note that PHSIEHD hopes that the evidenced soil and <br /> groundwater contamination will not pose a threat to the groundwater quality beneath the site. If you have any questions,please . <br /> do not hesitate to contact me at(209)468-0337. <br /> � r <br /> Donna Heran, RENS,Director 11 <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> Mary Meays,Senior RENS Margaret La rio,REHS <br /> Site Mitigation Unit Supervisoril <br /> MMI200BECKIMS <br /> cc: Elizabeth Thayer,Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board <br /> I <br /> cc: Karla Brasaemle,Weston <br /> cc: Ismael Jacabo, SWRCB Cleanup Unit <br /> A Division of San Joaquin County Health CYe Services <br />