Laserfiche WebLink
California Regional Water Quality Control Board <', <br /> Central Valley Region <br /> Robert Schneider,Chair �'��"�y <br /> Terry Tamminen Arnold Schwarzenegger <br /> Secretary for Sacramento Main Office Governor <br /> Environmental Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwgcb5 <br /> Protection 11020 Sun Center Drive#200 Rancho Cordova,CA 95670-6114 <br /> Phone(916)464-3291 Fax(916)464-4797 <br /> 6 May 2004 <br /> Mr. Tracy Sizemore <br /> ConocoPhillips <br /> 1500 North Priest, DC-40A <br /> Tempe, AZ 85281 <br /> MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NO. R5-2004-0824, FORMER BP <br /> TERMINAL #10013, STOCKTON, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> Staff of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) has reviewed <br /> the 28 April 2004 Comments on Draft Monitoring and Reporting Program (Letter) submitted by <br /> Earth Tech, Inc. on behalf of ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company(CP) for the former BP Oil <br /> Bulk Terminal No. 10013 at 3505 Navy Drive in Stockton. The Letter includes nine comments <br /> on the draft revised monitoring and reporting program sent to you on 2 March 2004. Regional <br /> Board staff concurs with two of the comments. The following are responses to the other seven <br /> comments: <br /> 1. Four of the comments in the Letter pertain to sampling frequency of fuel oxygenates. The <br /> monitoring wells listed in Table 1 of the MRP for fuel oxygenate sampling are wells that <br /> have either not met the requirements for sampling elimination or have detections of that <br /> fuel oxygenate. Regardless of the sampling frequency for other constituents of that well, <br /> CP must meet the sampling requirements as described in footnote 4 of Table 1. <br /> 2. Although Regional Board staff concurs that concentrations in monitoring wells MW-3 <br /> and MW-11 are not driving the current interim remedial measure of groundwater <br /> extraction,we do not concur with the reduction of sampling for these wells. Collecting <br /> samples on an annual basis from these wells will not provide sufficient data for <br /> evaluation of full-scale remedial alternatives. Furthermore, due to the detections of fuel <br /> oxygenates in these wells, annual sampling is not appropriate. <br /> 3. The listing of MW-11 for both semi-annual and annual sampling for two fuel oxygenates <br /> in Table 1 was inadvertent. As described in comment 92 above, annual sampling is not <br /> appropriate for this well. <br /> 4. Language regarding the gauging of free phase petroleum product or visible sheen is <br /> standard. If the site monitoring wells do not have free phase petroleum product or visible <br /> sheen, then this requirement should not be a concern for CP. <br /> California Environmental Protection Agency <br /> pRecycled Paper <br />