Laserfiche WebLink
ARCO Meeting Minutes - <br /> August 8, 1994 <br /> Page 4 <br /> ARCO 2078, Lodi(Mary Meays) <br /> Mary said that she had received the fast quarter�status report a d brought to our attention that 3 <br /> total xylenes was detected in MW-3 during the fourth quarter of 11993. EMCON stated that the <br /> reported concentration was 0.7 ppb which is below MCLS and co amination could have easily <br /> occurred in the laboratory (dirty glassware, cross contamination, etc.) In addition,this was the <br /> only sampling event in over a year which resuftec in the detectioe of hydrocarbons in ' <br /> groundwater. Laboratory results on groundwater samples colieded during he first and second i <br /> quarter of 1894 confirm that hydrocarbons are not present in the groundwater. 1 <br /> f <br /> Mary asked when ARCO would be scheduling remediation of the impacted soil. ARCO stated <br /> that a select number of abatement units have been allocated for San Joaquin County, and that } <br /> ARCO intends to focus remediation efforts on those sites which have the highest amount of i <br /> contamination or pose the greatest risk to groundwater and therefore anticipate remediation of <br /> the site to begin after six months. ARCO explained to Mary that this schedule was dependent on <br /> the availability and performance of remediation systems operating in the county. <br /> ARCO 548,Stockton, (Mary Meays) <br /> s <br /> Mary said that she had received the quarterly status report/PAR and that the PAR was deficient <br /> in areas outlined in her correspondence to ARCO and requested additional information (cross <br /> sections, remedial alternatives, VET results, etc.).Sj EMCON submitted an addendum to the PAR <br /> at the meetingg s <br /> Presenting this additional information. EMCON exlifained to Mary that based on <br /> conversations with her, an abbreviated PAR would�be excepted since only a limited amount of <br /> data had been collected since submitting the preliminary Investigation and Evaluation Report. <br /> Mary said that this was now not the case and complete PAR was required. EMCON told Mary t <br /> that the addendum that was submitted that date should satisfy all PAR requirements. <br /> F f <br /> Mary said that based on the first quarter status report it appears that dissolved hydrocarbon <br /> concentrations have increased and extend off-site. MARCO stated that the results of the first <br /> quarter sampling event may not accurate G <br /> h'present the groundwater quality. ARCO explained to l <br /> Mary that ARCO begin using a new groundwater sampling contractor the beginning of 1994 and r <br /> data collected from some <br /> sites are likely incorrect. EMCON informed Mary,that the results of <br /> second quarter sampling event show that the concentrations are back to levels that are <br /> consistent with previous quarters and that hydrocarbons do not extend Off-site. Mary said that <br /> she will review that data once she has received the report, <br /> r <br /> Mary asked ARCO if the source has been eliminated and implied that there is an ongoing leak <br /> from the tanks. ARCO replied by saying that the tanks and lines have been tested and are within <br /> the allotted parameters. Mary questioned the general validity of tank testing stating that the tests <br /> are not accurate and is sure that leakage is occurring. Diane Hinson redirected the discussion <br /> stating that the dialogue was based on conjecture. <br /> Mary asked ARCO what <br /> implemented. EMCON aced hremediation teymedn be of remediation ysso vapor extractia av�ere planned andpe ears to would be x <br /> f <br /> effective remedial alternative. Mary asked how groundwater was going to be reined atepde most <br /> EMCON said that the majority of dissolved hydrocarbons are located in the vicinity of the USTs ) <br /> and within the effective radius of influence Of the vapor extraction system. ARCO said that } <br /> remediation of groundwater was not going to be ignored and will monitor the effects the vapor <br /> extraction system has on the groundwater. Active groundwater remediation <br /> ump and <br /> sparging, etc.) will not be implemented at this time butlthe need will be evaluated during treat, air <br /> operation of the vapor extraction system and be discussed in suture quarterly status reports. <br /> t <br /> E <br /> i ! <br />