My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FIELD DOCUMENTS
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
K
>
KETTLEMAN
>
501
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545337
>
FIELD DOCUMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2020 8:09:10 PM
Creation date
2/11/2020 11:26:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
FIELD DOCUMENTS
RECORD_ID
PR0545337
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003629
FACILITY_NAME
ARCO STATION #434*
STREET_NUMBER
501
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
KETTLEMAN
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
LODI
Zip
95240
APN
03119028
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
501 W KETTLEMAN LN
P_LOCATION
02
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE DRXMLOAN,&Vwnor <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL B�ARD— <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 ROUTIER ROAD <br /> 8ACUMENTO,CA 48827-3048 <br /> 25 May 1989 <br /> Ms. Diane Hinson 3 <br /> San Joaquin Local Health District <br /> P. 0+ Box 2009 <br /> Stockton, CA 95201 <br /> WORK PLAN FOR ARCO STATION 434, 601 KETTLEMAN LANE, LODI, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> We reviewed the 10 March 1989 work plan and supplied our comments to ARCO in a <br /> 27 March 1989 letter. Brown and Caldwell En ineering submitted a 25 April <br /> 1989 response to our letter. Our comments on this latest submittal by Brown <br /> and Caldwell are as follows: <br /> Soil Characterization Work <br /> 1 . The extent of contaminated soil west and north of borehole B-2 needs to <br /> be defined, Brown and Caldwell believes that additional borings west <br /> and north of B-2 are not "necessary for soil characterization purposes" . <br /> They have not explained their reasoning. There is a zone of highly <br /> t contaminated soil (hazardous waste levels) immediately above the ground <br /> 4 water surface that has not been delineated. We agree that it may have <br /> been transported there on ground water or the capillary fringe, but the <br /> source of the contamination was the leaking product line at the ARCO <br /> station, We recommend that ARCO have their consultant accurately <br /> delineate the lateral and vertical distribution of the contaminants in <br /> the soil . <br /> 3. We have no objection to Brown and Caldwell 's request not to take vapor <br /> meter readings on the nine continuous core samples. <br /> Proposed Modification to the Soil Characterization Work <br /> 1. We have no objections to vapor recovery wells being installed in <br /> the boreholes proposed to delineate soil contamination. Our only <br /> concern is that Brown and Caldwell proposes to screen these wells from 7 <br /> to 45 feet below grade, and have supplied no rationale for selecting <br /> this interval . Discreet screened intervals place at zones of <br /> x_ __ .contaminati_on_would facilitate_avmore_,efficient and cost effective soil <br /> remedfat'lon. � Ideally, we recommend that analytical results' of soil <br /> samples be used to identify the zones of contamination and the screened <br /> intervals should be designed accordingly, but the continuous core <br /> samples may make it possible to design' the screen interval of each well <br /> based on field data. They plan to use' field evidence to select the ' <br /> boreholes for vapor recovery well instlallations. We suggest that this <br /> field evidence also be used to select the best screen interval (s) for <br /> each well . <br /> ,4 I <br /> E <br /> -ti. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.