Laserfiche WebLink
San Joaquin County <br /> �oPQu/" Environmental Health Department <br /> DIRECTOR <br /> --,�=.'•.O <br /> G <br /> Q 600 East Main Street Donna Heran,REHS <br /> Stockton, California 95202-3029 PROGRAM COORDINATORS <br /> ' Robert McClellon,REHS 1 <br /> Jeff Carruesco,REHS,RDI <br /> CqC/FOR�`P Website:www.sjgovorg/ehd Kasey Foley,REHS <br /> Phone: <br /> (209)468-3420 <br /> Fax: (209)464-0138 <br /> August 26, 2010 <br /> Palisades Gas &Wash Ms. Sandy Edwards <br /> Mr. Charles Miller Tesoro Refining & Marketing Co <br /> 6591 Collins Drive, Suite E-11 3450 South 344"'Way, Suite 201 <br /> Moorpark, CA 93012 Auburn, WA 98001-5931 <br /> Subject' USA-Pahsades_Gas#835 __ I OP_Case._# 1.&2_39-0068__$_39-0672 _ <br /> (former Exxon #73708) CUF#: 18731 &5230 <br /> 2705 Country Club Blvd. APN: 121-210-08/09 <br /> Stockton, CA 95204 Global IDs#: T0607723486/T0607700522 <br /> The San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department (EHD) has reviewed Semi- <br /> Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report, Second Quarter 2010—Palisades Gas and Wash <br /> # 835 (Report) dated June 28, 2010, prepared by Stratus Environmental, Inc. (Stratus). <br /> The Report covered the groundwater sampling event held on-site June 10, 2010. <br /> Discussions and recommendations included in the report responded to the EHD verbal <br /> request last June for a site status update and plans for the site in the immediate and <br /> distant future. With relatively a low mass of dissolved contaminants beneath the site and <br /> the absence of close sensitive receptors near the site, it was concluded by Stratus, that <br /> active groundwater remedial measures are not justified. The EHD concurs. <br /> Also included in the Report was a rationale that collecting soil gas samples to evaluate <br /> potential vapor intrusion health risks to the public was not needed. Stratus held that the <br /> site is currently an active gasoline dispensing facility, is scheduled to remain this way in <br /> the future, and that the health risk posed by vapor releases from the fueling operation <br /> greatly exceeds that posed by vapor intrusion from the petroleum hydrocarbons in the <br /> subsurface. Additionally, it was concluded by your consultant that the potential for <br /> contaminant vapor exposure to the workers or public is minimized by the existing <br /> building's construction, paving of the site, the relative distance of impacted soil from the <br /> convenience store building, and the positive pressure heating/air conditioning system <br /> installed for the building. This may well be the case, however please provide additional <br /> evaluation of the potential for vapor intrusion based on 1) the estimated sorbed <br /> contaminant mass associated with your unauthorized release (UAR) from your former <br /> underground storage tank (UST) system, 2) its estimated distance from the building <br /> onsite, and 3)your UAR sorbed mass distribution. <br /> If the evaluation is favorable, you may submit the report as part of a No Further Action <br /> Report/Request (NFAR) to the EHD. Please follow the Tri-Regional Board Staff <br /> 2705 Country Club req NFAR CML,8-23-10 <br />