Laserfiche WebLink
11 <br />i <br />1.0 Introduction <br />P� <br />9 0 <br />This Feasibility Study (FS) report has been prepared by Shaw Environmental, Inc. (Shaw), on <br />behalf of Mr. Don Rodgers (the property owner), for The Transmission Shop site at Stockton, <br />California. The purpose of this FS is to identify, evaluate, and select the remedial alternative to <br />address the petroleum hydrocarbon contamination in the groundwater at the site. The presence <br />of petroleum hydrocarbons in the groundwater was reportedly a result of historical leaks from a <br />former underground storage tank (UST) on site. Following the guidance described in Section <br />2725 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 16, this FS is <br />developed as a part of the Corrective Action Plan for the site and is issued in accordance with the <br />request of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley (CVRWQCB) <br />(2007a). <br />1.1 Site Location <br />The site is located at 515 West Charter Way, less than 1,000 feet east of Interstate Highway 5, in <br />the city of Stockton, California. A Site Location Map is shown on Figure 1. Situated on the <br />northwest corner of the intersection of Lincoln Way and West Charter Way, the site resides <br />within a mixed commercial and residential area. There are former or current retail service <br />stations at each corner of the intersection. Figure 2 shows the current site layout and its <br />immediate surrounding area. <br />1.2 Document Organization <br />The following sections of this FS are organized as such: <br />• Section 2.0 provides further description of the site, including its environmental setting <br />and local geology and hydrogeology. A brief narrative of the site investigation history <br />is also presented therein. <br />• Section 3.0 describes the treatment objectives for the onsite groundwater based on the <br />nature and the approximate extent of the contamination. <br />Section 4.0 discusses the identification and evaluation of treatment alternatives that <br />are potentially applicable and appropriate for the site. <br />• Section 5.0 presents a comparison of the alternatives identified in Section 4.0 and the <br />selected alternative based on results of the comparison. <br />• Section 6.0 summarizes conclusions and recommendations for the site. <br />1 FS_ Onsite Petroleum Hydrocarbon Remediation.doc 1-1 Shaw Environmental, Inc. <br />