My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_1988-1991
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
R
>
ROTH
>
850
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0506824
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_1988-1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/7/2020 3:14:45 PM
Creation date
4/7/2020 2:36:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
1988-1991
RECORD_ID
PR0506824
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0007648
FACILITY_NAME
DDRW - SHARPES
STREET_NUMBER
850
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
ROTH
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
LATHROP
Zip
95330
APN
19802001
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
850 E ROTH RD BLDG S-108
P_LOCATION
07
P_DISTRICT
003
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
470
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
David Wang, P.E. , Chief <br /> August 12, 1991 <br /> Page 4 <br /> implementation of a reinjection alternative, <br /> additional efforts may be necessary. Those <br /> efforts may include additional modeling, <br /> demonstration/pilot field testing projects, <br /> and/or the possible expansion of the ground <br /> water monitoring network. <br /> The concerns with a reinjection alternative <br /> are, that considering the highly variable <br /> hydrogeology at Sharpe, the possibility <br /> exists that reinjection may adversely effect <br /> the contaminant plume characteristics. Such <br /> effects may include splitting the plume due <br /> to the preferential transport pathways. <br /> Additionally, it is possible that the aquifer <br /> may not be capable of accepting the <br /> quantities of effluent that will be generated <br /> at Sharpe. <br /> All of the options for effluent disposal evaluated have <br /> limitations, which in some cases may have severe impacts <br /> upon the remediation project. It appears that it may be <br /> impossible, at Sharpe, to rely solely on one disposal <br /> option. Therefore, the Department should work with Sharpe <br /> on the evaluation and development of an acceptable "disposal <br /> network" . <br /> Additionally, Sharpe should consider other possible disposal <br /> options. The Draft Final Ground Water FS evaluated that use <br /> of a Public Owned Treatment Works (POTW) for the purposes of <br /> the treatment of contaminated waste, but not for the <br /> purposes of disposal of treated effluent. The local POTW <br /> should be considered as a possible disposal option. Another <br /> option, that may warrant consideration is the use of the <br /> effluent for wetlands restoration. However, it is noted <br /> that this option may be impractical due to the fact that it <br /> is estimated that remediation will take approximately 16 <br /> years. Therefore, the ability to provide for long-term <br /> maintenance of restored wetlands would be questionable. <br /> 4 . ARSENIC - Arsenic has been found at numerous locations <br /> throughout Sharpe in both the soils and ground water. <br /> Sharpe has conducted extensive studies into the extent and <br /> nature of the arsenic found at and around the site. Based <br /> upon the information provided in both the Draft Final Ground <br /> Water FS and the related Remedial Investigation Report, the <br /> source of the arsenic can not be irrefutably identified. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.