Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. William H. CrWs <br /> November 4, 1996 <br /> Page2. <br /> 0.5 ug/l. These factors, plus the fact that the contain xiants appeared to be <br /> coming from an cin-site source -- i.e., not from the Lodi Groundwater Plume, <br /> prompted the Department to urge EHD to withhold closure on the:site on <br /> October 10, 1996. See attached letter from jean Young to Mike Infurna. <br /> • 4 <br /> The assumption.seems to be that the problems at the Texaco site will be <br /> addressed by the City. EIID's Case Closure Summary slates: <br /> Petroleum constituents considered to be not'as problematic as existing; <br /> groundwater,solvent;problem. Site ire CVIZWQCB Solvent Plume <br /> Study, Lodi Area. <br /> If the Regional Board grants closure on this site the MTBE and DCA will <br /> continue:to threaten.the City's water supply for the forseeable future. 'While: <br /> the City may assume same groundwater remediation obligation wth'regard. <br /> to the Lodi Groundwater.Plume, the City is not going to solve Texaco's M <br /> and:DCA problem.. <br /> Based on the foregoing the City respectfully'requests that the Regior►al <br /> Board advise EHD that it will not consider the Texaco site for closure until all <br /> contaminants at the site have beery addressed. <br /> 3 <br /> Sincerely;. <br /> �3 J" <br /> Michael V rad <br /> .MVB:If: <br /> .Enclosures ; <br /> ya. <br /> Cca Fran E. Forkas <br /> Randall:l;lays Y{ <br /> James: Curtis <br /> Wendy Cohen <br /> aures, Brathovde <br /> Jerry Marcotte <br /> Margaret Lagono <br /> 1Vlichael_Iiifurna,x <br /> bavr E. Moser <br /> Steven H. Goldberg <br /> r <br /> y <br />