Laserfiche WebLink
OMern orand um1b <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD • CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 Routier Road Phone: (916) 361-5600 <br /> Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 ATSS: 8-495.5600 <br /> TO: Laurie Cotulla FROM: Gary A. Reents <br /> San Joaquin Local Health District Project Engineer <br /> DATE: 23 October 1987 SIGNATURE: <br /> SUBJECT: PG AND E TRACY SERVICE CENTER REPORT . AND PROPOSAL, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> I have reviewed the above subjects accompanying PG and E 's 29 September letter and <br /> have the following comments: <br /> 1. I agree that ethylene dibromide (EDB) may be present in ground water beneath <br /> the site from surrounding agricultural activities. However, comparison of <br /> results from upgradient versus downgradient monitoring wells will determine if <br /> the site is a contributing source. Additionally, ethylene dichloride (1,2- <br /> Dichloroethane) is a common gasoline additive and potential ground water <br /> contaminant. Accordingly, all ground water analyses must include these two <br /> constituents. <br /> 2. Since PG and E has elected to analyze for total lead, background analyses <br /> should consist of at least three samples from uncontaminated areas of similar <br /> soil types. <br /> 3. Collecting and analyzing soil samples from the proposed monitor well borings <br /> will not be productive. Soil sampling should be performed in the area of the <br /> tank to define soil contamination. Proposed monitoring well locations will be . <br /> outside this area. <br /> 4. PG and E has proposed no actions to define and remediate soil contamination in <br /> the area of the leaking tank. Soil sampling and mitigation actions should be <br /> performed at the same time as tank removal . <br /> 5. All of the proposed wells should be sampled and analyzed for all constituents <br /> of concern once installed. <br /> 6. Future submittals -should contain a time schedule for all proposed work. Two <br /> copies of all reports and workplans should be supplied. <br /> 7. The chromatagrams in the Soil Vapor Assessment Report are illegible. Two <br /> readable copies of the report should be resubmitted. <br /> In order to expedite the project, PG and E should be allowed to initiate work <br /> on-site as long as all the above comments are incorporated into their work plan. <br /> GAR:ej <br />