My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
D
>
DR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR
>
749
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544218
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2019 9:50:04 AM
Creation date
3/5/2019 9:27:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 2
RECORD_ID
PR0544218
PE
3526
FACILITY_ID
FA0003870
FACILITY_NAME
SRH FOOD & GAS
STREET_NUMBER
749
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
DR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR
STREET_TYPE
BLVD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
14734309
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
749 E DR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
WNg
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
171
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
Rodger Liston <br /> Darpetro Inc. - - - <br /> - - 749 E. Charter Way, Stockton, California <br /> Page 5 of 7 <br /> would change considerably. Another major weakness of CGG presenting the 1997 TBA <br /> and MTBE maps to show migration onto the site from the south is that well BM-3 was <br /> not tested in 1997; the 1998 maps, with BM-3 data included , demolish the argument. In <br /> 1997 the interpretation may have been somewhat reasonable, but with the knowledge <br /> and data available in 2004, the 1997 maps - lacking data for the significant monitoring <br /> point at BM-3 - cannot be accepted today as valid plume models for 1997. <br /> It is the opinion of EHD that the data presented by CGG has more than one possible <br /> interpretation and can even be utilized to interpret the source of contamination to be the <br /> subject site . While an adequate site conceptual model may demonstrate CGG's <br /> interpretation to be correct, EHD finds the revised SCM to still be less than compelling ; <br /> indeed EHD interprets the data to indicate that the current UST system onsite may have <br /> been the source of the contaminants centered on monitoring well BM-3, as was noted in <br /> the discussion of the TBA and MTBE concentration maps . Other data supporting an on <br /> site source are as follows: <br /> 1 . Mapping of the first occurrences of MTBE in the BM wells shows a bull's eye <br /> near BMA , BM-3 and BM-5 , as was noted in EHD's 05 September letter; <br /> 2. Mapping the highest MTBE concentrations detected in each well also shows a <br /> bull's eye on or near BM- 1 , . BM-3 and BM-4; <br /> 3. In 2000 , the spill buckets were replaced on the USTs without permit or regulatory <br /> oversight; reportedly the spill buckets had been leaking ; <br /> 4 . During the November 2000 inspection of the UST system, numerous violations <br /> were noted ; <br /> 5. During installation of pans under the dispensers in November 2003, soil samples <br /> were collected and analyzed — MTBE and petroleum hydrocarbons were <br /> detected , soil from under the dispenser closest to BM-3 had the highest <br /> concentrations; <br /> 6. Since replacement of the spill buckets, MTBE concentrations in the impacted BM <br /> wells have generally declined . <br /> It should be noted that an EHD inspector reported no odor or staining was noted in a <br /> pea-gravel sample collected 4 feet below the replaced spill buckets on 27 June 2001 . <br /> Pea gravel , with its lack of fines and low surface area to volume ratio would have a much <br /> lower sorbtion rate than normal soil. EHD believes the data to indicate that most of the <br /> MTBE and associated contaminants were released on your site during your tenure on <br /> the property and/or during USA's operation on the property, and that you should be <br /> moving ahead to finish the site characterization and perform appropriate remediation of <br /> impacted ground water. In view of this discussion, EHD will reconsider CGG's work plan <br /> for a soil gas survey around the UST system , if your consultant concurs, with revised <br /> depths of investigation to better address possible release points from the system. <br /> Sampling points should be in close proximity to the suspected source and should be at a <br /> depth most likely to pick up vapor from a release from the suspected source. Please <br /> submit the revised work plan by 10 May 2004 . <br /> Review of the quarterly reports causes some concern with the quality of work performed <br /> during ground water monitoring events . As noted in the EHD letter dated 03 November <br /> 2003 , deficiencies with the monitoring procedures during the October 2003 ground water <br /> monitoring event had been noted by EHD . EHD visited the site as the second-to-last well <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.