My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 1
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
G
>
GRANT LINE
>
13170
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0505432
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/24/2020 3:08:30 PM
Creation date
1/24/2020 2:34:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 1
RECORD_ID
PR0505432
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0006779
FACILITY_NAME
DIVIDEND PROPERTY
STREET_NUMBER
13170
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
GRANT LINE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95376
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
13170 W GRANT LINE RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
256
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Chevron Pipeline Co.,Dividend Property -4- 7 March 1996 <br /> and Chevron did not feel that they could convince me of their position on this case. The following <br /> comments respond to these issues: <br /> a) My review of this case does not relying solely on taste and odor thresholds to determine <br /> beneficial use impacts and threats. I compared both taste and odor thresholds and "available <br /> toxicologic criteria from the literature with measured concentrations of pollutants in ground <br /> water before reaching my conclusion that pollution of ground water exists at this site. These <br /> procedures are clearly consistent with our Basin Plan water quality objectives for toxicity <br /> and taste and odor(copies attached), which are designed to protect beneficial uses of ground <br /> waters. Ground waters beneath this site, including shallow zones, having either existing or . <br /> potential beneficial uses of municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial <br /> supply, as stated in our Basin Plan. Both toxicity and organoleptic effects can render water <br /> unusable'for municipal and domestic supply. <br /> b) This case,is not a soil-only case, as discussed above. It very well may be a low-risk case. To <br /> demonstrate low-risk, we need to be confident that pollutant concentrations will be reduced <br /> to below water quality objectives before the water is likely to be beneficially used. To <br /> clearly demonstrate that this is the case and that closure is appropriate for the site (e.g., no <br /> additional active remediation nor monitoring), sufficient documentation is needed. The <br /> documentation that we have requested is no more or less than that requested of dischargers <br /> responsible for leaking underground petroleum tanks in this Region, as contained in the Tri- <br /> Regional Recommendations, Appendix B. Our position is consistent with that expressed by <br /> USEPA, Region 9 in their Fact Sheet on the Lawrence Livermore report on California's <br /> le,â–ºking underground storage tank program, a report that has neither been formally accepted <br /> nor publicly debated by the members of the State Water Resources Control Board. <br /> Attachments (2) <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.