My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
N
>
NAVY
>
2947
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0009278
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2020 11:50:23 AM
Creation date
3/30/2020 11:44:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0009278
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0004013
FACILITY_NAME
SFPP, LP STOCKTON TERMINAL
STREET_NUMBER
2947
STREET_NAME
NAVY
STREET_TYPE
DR
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
2947 NAVY DR
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
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.
/
189
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
Mr. Stephan Defibaugh 0 - 2 - 29 February 2008 <br /> KMEP Stockton Terminal <br /> The Summary describes the other six remedial technologies, including MNA, bioventing, <br /> biosparging, enhanced bioremediation using nitrate, enhanced bioremediation using injection <br /> of extracted groundwater enhanced with dissolved oxygen and nutrients, and ozone injection. <br /> LFR evaluated these technologies based on site-specific constraints, relative feasibility, and <br /> estimated long-term success. The Summary discusses pilot studies conducted on the Site or <br /> nearby sites, and concludes that MNA continues to be the most feasible and effective <br /> alternative for the Site under the current land use. <br /> KMEP has performed MNA sampling and evaluation for almost three years at this Site. In the <br /> Annual Report, LFR states that the site wells show generally decreasing or stable <br /> concentrations. However, the concentrations of pollutants in SP/M-9 and SP/M-10 do not <br /> show a decreasing trend, but instead fluctuate up and down. While some biodegradation may <br /> be occurring, concentrations of several constituents, including TPHg, TPHd, benzene and <br /> MTBE, remain considerably above water quality objectives. Thus, it is not clear whether MNA <br /> is able to clean up water quality at the Site in a reasonable time. <br /> In a 25 March 2005 letter, the Regional Water Board's Executive Officer approved MNA as the <br /> remedial alternative for the Site. In a 19 December 2006 letter, Regional Water Board staff <br /> concurred that MNA remained an acceptable remedial strategy, but required that future annual <br /> monitoring reports contain "an estimate of the time for groundwater chemical concentrations to <br /> reach water quality objectives." However, neither the 2006 Annual Report (dated January <br /> 2007) nor the 2007 Annual Report (dated January 2008) contained this estimate. Therefore, <br /> by 21 March 2008, KMEP must submit this information and include updated estimates in <br /> future Annual Reports. <br /> Mr. Aparjeet Rangi is the new case worker for this site. If you have any questions you may <br /> contact him at (916) 464-4760 or by e-mail at a rang i(a)waterboards.ca.gov, or me at (916) <br /> 464-5817 or wcohen(�waterboards.ca.gov. <br /> WENDYiL. COHEN, P.E. <br /> Chief, Aboveground Tanks Cleanup Unit <br /> cc: Mr. Harlin Knoll, San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department, Stockton <br /> Mr. Ken Yeo, Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, Sacramento <br /> Ms. Rita Koehnen, Port of Stockton, Stockton <br /> Mr. Jeremy Hughes, LFR, Granite Bay <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.