Laserfiche WebLink
_. 55 <br /> k F 1 <br /> i <br /> Fontana Pump Station at Smith Canal, Stockton <br /> Page 2 <br /> City of Stockton (COS) decided to look into soil venting as a remediation <br /> alternative. <br /> 01/30/96 EHD and COS agreed that the mass volume and trend of impacted <br /> groundwater should be calculated before considering if active remediation is <br /> necessary. J <br /> 05/08/98 Installed skimmer in MW-4 to enhance effort to remove the free product. <br /> 07/22/99 A 24-hour groundwater extraction test in MW-4 was conducted to evaluate 1 <br /> the feasibility of groundwater extraction as a remediation alternative and to <br /> remove the remaining free product in MW-4. <br /> 09/17/99 3 soil borings SB11, SB-12, and SB-13 were advanced in the area around <br /> I <br /> MW-4. Analytical results of the grab groundwater samples indicated the <br /> extent of the contamination in groundwater is not defined. <br /> 09/27/00 EHD received Summary Report of Pumping Test dated September 19, 2000 <br /> prepared by ATC Associates, Inc (ATC). Groundwater extraction does not <br /> appear to be a viable remediation option based on the report. The report <br /> recommended passive remediation but did not include any specific proposal. <br /> 04/04/01 EHD denied COS's request that the site be closed as recommended in the <br /> Closure Report dated March 15, 2001 prepared by ATG The extent of the <br /> contamination in groundwater has not been defined and the concentration of. <br /> diesel in MW-3 groundwater samples has increased. <br /> 04/23/01 5 soil borings SB-14 to SB-18 were advanced at the site. <br /> 10/11/01 EHD requested an additional monitoring well be installed in the northeast <br /> corner of the property in a meeting between EHD and COS. <br /> 02/01/02 MW-7 was installed at a location slightly different than what was proposed <br /> due to access limitations. <br /> 03/12/03 Analytical results of samples from all wells on site were non-detect the last 3 <br /> quarters except MW-4. EHD agreed to submit site to Regional Water <br /> Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for concurrence for closure. <br /> 1 04/03/03 EHD was informed that the property immediately adjacent to the site was <br /> 11 being dewatered for the COS sanitary line construction project. Submission <br /> of closure concurrence to RWQCB was delayed until the effect of the <br /> dewatering activity on the contamination plume could be assessed. <br /> 10/24/03 Samplings and monitoring of the depth to groundwater indicated the <br /> dewatering project,now terminated, did not affect the contamination plume.' <br /> EHD agreed a request for closure concurrence should be submitted to <br /> RQWCB. <br /> I <br />