Laserfiche WebLink
February 2, 1996 Shell Oil Meeting <br /> Page 2 <br /> Quarterly groundwater monitoring will continue and groundwater samples from <br /> monitoring well, MW3 will undergo methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) analysis to <br /> verify that the oxygenate additive was not used during the operation of the former <br /> underground storage tanks located at this site. <br /> 7910 Lower Sacramento Road <br /> PHS/EHD indicated that additional soil investigation was required, in the area of the <br /> western pump island and in the area that samples T5 and T6 were collected at the <br /> time of tank removal, before closure evaluation could be considered. There was <br /> considerable disagreement expressed by Shell Oil with regard to the necessity for <br /> additional investigation in the area that samples T5 and T6 were collected. <br /> PHS/EHD explained that while groundwater had not been impacted, as determined <br /> by monitoring data from on site monitoring wells, the extent of soil contamination <br /> had not been determined so that the potential risk to groundwater could be <br /> evaluated. Shell and Fugro indicated that they would evaluate PHS/EHD's directive <br /> further and respond at a later time. <br /> 2575 Country Club Boulevard <br /> PHS/EHD stated that a work plan to continue the investigation was submitted, but <br /> a site map and permit application had not been submitted. A general discussion <br /> followed regarding soil characterization and MTBE analysis. <br /> 6131 Pacific Avenue <br /> Fugro indicated that a work plan to continue soil characterization and to install <br /> additional wells would be prepared. Fugro also stated that the vapor extraction <br /> piping which has already been installed was being further evaluated. <br /> Summary <br /> The use of ASTM Standard Guide for Risk Based Corrective Action Applied at <br /> Petroleum Release Sites (RBCA) in San Joaquin County was discussed. Since the <br /> standard does not reflect the State of California water quality objectives, it cannot <br /> be relied upon when making regulatory decisions. Shell stated that they would like <br /> to incorporate references to RBCA when evaluating their sites and that they were <br /> not going to use the standard to justify site closure. PHS/EHD agreed that working <br /> through the process would afford a greater familiarity with the standard and that <br /> overall decision making would be enhanced, with regard to the incorporation and <br /> modifications of some aspects of the standard for use in California. <br /> PHS/EHD requested that the presentation of data in tables be modified so that <br /> depth to water changes and concentration changes could be better compared. <br /> Shell Oil indicated that they were in the process of building a data base system to <br />