Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT <br /> PQU I" <br /> .0 SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> ' <br /> ' y Donna K, Heran, R.E.H.S. Unit Supervisors <br /> Director 304 East Weber Avenue,Third Floor Carl$orgman,R.E.H.S. <br /> Laurie A. Cotulla, R.E.H.S. Stockton,California 95202-2708 Mike Huggins, R.E.H.S., R.D.I. <br /> c �+Fo`�T'P • Program Manager Telephone: (209)468-3420 Douglas W.Wilson, R.E.H.S. <br /> 4 Margaret Lagorio,R.E.H.S. <br /> Fax: (209) 464-0138 Robert McClellon, R.E.H.S. <br /> Website:www.sjgov.org/ehd/ Jeff Carruesco,R.E.H.S. <br /> ERNEST J POMBO JR MAR 2 8 2006 <br /> 1755 W 17.T1 STREET <br /> TRACY CA 95376 <br /> RE: Pombo Ranch Property SITE. CODE: 508110 <br /> 24100 Lammers. Road <br /> Tracy CA 95376 <br /> San.Joaquin County. Environmental Health Department (SJC/EHD) has. reviewed. <br /> Quarterly Groundwater Sampling Report; First Quarter 2006 dated January 2006, <br /> prepared on your behalf. by. M.J..Kloberdanz &Associates and has the following <br /> comments. <br /> A remediation of contaminated soil was conducted at your site during February 2005.. <br /> . Petroleum hydrocarbon contaminated soil was excavated.from the location.of two former <br /> underground. storage tanks and hauled offsite for disposal. Four routine quarterly <br /> groundwater monitoring and.sampling events have been. completed since.the. remedial. <br /> action.took place. Analytical results indicateremoval of the source of the contamination <br /> has had.a positive effect on the groundwater.contamination, Current analytical results <br /> from the.wells at this. site that have. had.detections.of contamination in the past are either <br /> non-detect or an order of magnitude lower than they were before the remediation. <br /> Please.have your consultant prepare.a closure report for this sitefollowing,the. Regional <br /> Water Quality. Control. Board Tri-Regional Guidelines, Appendix A... Include. in the report <br /> an estimate of contaminant mass remaining at the site, in. both soil and groundwater. in <br /> addition, please include a. calculation of the total amount of soil removed from the site <br /> during.the excavation. The Remedial Excavation & Source Removal Report„dated <br /> April 13, 2005 did not state the total.quantity.of impacted.soil removed.from the site.for <br /> disposal.. Estimated lateral. dimensions.of the excavation were.stated,. but the depth of <br /> impacted soil is not clear. Part of the excavation area had.approximately 5 feet of clean <br /> overburden, part had. 8 feet. Clean overburden soil was stored onsite and used.to. backfill <br /> the.excavation. Total depth of the excavation was 12 feet below surface grade (bsg) <br /> indicating,therefore, that the vertical extent of contaminated soil ranged from 4-7 feet. <br /> Using the.worst case scenario of 7 feet of impacted soil, and the approximate dimensions <br /> of the excavation area stated in the excavation report,.an estimated 1,000 cubic yards of <br /> soil would have been hauled for disposal. The Disposal Activity. Report submitted from <br /> the. IandOlt states.that 2,880 yards of soil were received and.that it weighed 1524.71 tons. <br /> Some of the soil received.was classified as. Class II soil and some.was classified as <br /> Environmental Class ll soil.. Please explain this information and provide a final.estimate of <br /> the total volume of contaminated.soil removed.from the site, and.a calculation of the <br /> contaminant mass contained in that soil. <br />