Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> PUBLIC HtALTH SERVICES110Pa��N...� <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION ." <br /> Karen Furst, M.D., M.P.H., Health Officer <br /> 304 East Weber Avenue, Third Floor • Stockton, CA 95202 `' Q¢ <br /> 2091468-3420 <br /> rJUN 13 2000 <br /> Mr. Luis Lechich <br /> Valley Showcase <br /> P.O. Box 881 <br /> Stockton CA 95201-0881 <br /> RE: Valley Showcase Site Code: 1114 <br /> 913 W. Fremont Street <br /> Stockton CA 95203 <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services,Environmental Health Division (PHS/EHD) <br /> has reviewed Grawzi WaterMo-atonngand Sampling Report(the report) dated December 30, <br /> 1999 prepared byJJW Geosciences,Inc. GN. PHS/EHD has the following comments. <br /> The report recommended the site should be closed and a "no further action required" letter <br /> be issued by the appropriate regulatory agencies; however, the report did not provide the <br /> justification and rationale for closure. The report provided mass balance quantities of the <br /> total gasoline remaining in the soil and in the groundwater, however,no calculations or <br /> identities of the sample analytical results used to determine these numbers were included. <br /> Although a facsimile of the hand-calculations of the contamination mass was subsequently <br /> submitted to PHS/EHD from JJW on June 2, 2000,the information lacks the identifications <br /> of the sample analytical results JJW selected for the calculations. The report (and the <br /> Montt mrg Well Installation and Qwnedy Grm�ter Moms ng Report Septen� <br /> 1999 dated November 30, 1999 prepared byJN included Figure 4 indicating the inferred <br /> isoconcentration of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH g); however,this figure <br /> is significantly different from previous figures showing the lines of equal concentration of <br /> TPH g included in reports prepared by Wm J. Hunter&Associates. No explanation was <br /> included for this difference. The report did not include figures of isoconcentration of other <br /> contaminants such as the aromatic petroleum hydrocarbons. The report did not provide <br /> discussion/data-interpretation of the definition of the lateral and horizontal extent of the <br /> contamination in soil as well as in groundwater. <br /> Based on historical activities and reports of the site,the vertical extent of the contamination <br /> in the soil appears to have been defined. Analytical results of the soil sample collected at <br /> 15.5 feet below surface grade (bsg) during the installation of Monitoring Well (NM #2 (the <br /> well with consistently the highest level of contamination in groundwater) in February 1994 <br /> were 1,200 parts per million (ppm) of TPH g,while the results of the soil samples taken at <br /> 20.5 feet bsg and 25.5 feet bsg were both non-detect (ND) in TPH g and in aromatic <br /> hydrocarbons as Benzene,Toluene,Ethyl Benzene, and Xylenes (BTEX collectively). <br /> Analytical results of the soil sample taken at 15 feet bsg from MW-5 installed in September <br /> A Division of San Joaquin County Health Care Services <br />