My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
V
>
VICTOR
>
880
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0503634
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2019 4:40:56 PM
Creation date
5/7/2019 4:15:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0503634
PE
2950
FACILITY_ID
FA0005914
FACILITY_NAME
VICTOR ROAD SHELL
STREET_NUMBER
880
STREET_NAME
VICTOR
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
LODI
Zip
95240
APN
04905032
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
880 VICTOR RD
P_LOCATION
02
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
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.
/
275
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
San Joaquin County DIRECTOR <br /> Donna Heran,REHS <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> oP- c ASSISTANT DIRECTOR <br /> 600 East Main Street Laurie Cotulla,REHS <br /> N :< Stockton, California 95202-3029 PROGRAM COORDINATORS <br /> Cad Bergman,REHS <br /> Mike Huggins,REHS,RDI <br /> • c :. v • Website: www.sjgov.org/ehd Margaret Lagorio, REHS <br /> 9Q 96.0 Phone: (209) 468-3420 Robert McClellon,REHS <br /> Fax: (209)464-0138 Jeff Carruesco,REHS,RDI <br /> Kasey Foley,REHS <br /> 30 June 2008 <br /> Messrs. Robert Trommer, CHG, and Kirk Larson, PG <br /> State Water Resources Control Board <br /> Division of Financial Assistance <br /> 1001 1 Street <br /> Sacramento CA 95814 <br /> Subject: Preliminary Five-Year Review Letters <br /> San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department (EHD) has received and <br /> reviewed numerous preliminary five-year review letters each with your request to convey <br /> the EHD's agreement or disagreement with the site-specific recommendations. The EHD <br /> comments for a selection of those sites are provided herein, sites not noted in this letter <br /> will be addressed in the near future. Due to the high volume of preliminary five-year <br /> review letters and the ongoing workload and commitments of the EHD, the following <br /> comments pertain only to the recommendations; other information in the five-year letters <br /> that is incorrect or incomplete is noted only insofar as that information directly affects the <br /> recommendations. <br /> 1901 EI Dorado Street, S. <br /> • The State Water Resources Control Board Cleanup Fund Five Year Review <br /> Committee (CUF) recommends that the EHD direct the Responsible Party (RP) <br /> to implement soil vapor extraction (SVE) and assess the efficacy of (insitu) air <br /> sparging (IAS) to achieve Water Quality Objectives (WQOs) more rapidly. The <br /> EHD partially agrees with this recommendation; a significant clay interval in the <br /> area of the water table may impede effective recovery of air and stripped <br /> hydrocarbons from IAS. The consultant has concluded that the site is not suitable <br /> for groundwater extraction (GWE), but has recommended dual phase extraction <br /> (DPE). The EHD has directed submittal of a work plan for a DPE pilot test by 07 <br /> July 2008. <br /> 2404 Pacific Avenue <br /> • The CUF recommends that the EHD direct the RP to assess the efficacy of the <br /> current groundwater treatment system and modify it as necessary to achieve <br /> WQOs in a timely manner. The SVE/IAS operation was terminated in November <br /> 2006 by the consultant; dissolved contaminant concentrations rebounded after <br /> five months of non-operation. The EHD directed rebound testing, the consultant <br /> disagreed with rebound testing and proposed reinitiating SVE/IAS operation and <br /> installation of additional SVE wells; the EHD is not satisfied with the technical <br /> 5-Year Review Comment Letter 063008.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.