Laserfiche WebLink
��Co I I �C� <br /> �- 4 <br /> Mr. Kyle Christie., _ ;�. _. <br /> 22 February 1989 ';°" " <br /> ARCO Products Company y ` '# ' <br /> • 200 Alameda de las Pulgas <br /> P.O. Box 5811 <br /> San Mateo, CA 94403 ,Y '' T. , t , <br /> 3 WORK PLAN FOR PROBLEM ASSESSMENT INVESTIGATION ,FOR ARCO STATION NO. 2093 AT <br /> 3425 TRACY BOULEVARD, TRACY, SAN JAOQUIN:COUNTY�' t 4--f. <br /> Thank you for submitting your' l0i-Oct�ober. 1988 'work plan'for this_ site for our fr, <br /> review. This 1 etter I s a response to.both ,they 10-October 1988 work` plan and ' <br /> ,y/\J the incomplete `27 September .1987 'PAR. ; ` .�� �„�. �� ,. <br /> _4WORK PLAN (10 October 1988) -1 <br /> til <br /> he work proposed in this work plan will not define the full ext-ent 'of k} <br /> petroleum hydrocarbon contamination related to this site. °A site-assessment, <br /> and corresponding PAR, cannot be considered complete,5until .�the "effective zero <br /> line" has been establ i•shed. . ;:I, discussed .this, by telephone;�with your 1 <br /> consultant, Mr. Lawrence Phillips of Brown and Caldwell (BC) on"2L,February <br /> 1989. Mr. ,Phillips stated that BC, in agreement with ARCO; plans a phased <br /> approach site investigation�_which consists of the- on:,site phase followed by <br /> the off-site phase. The current work plan is far the on=site phase of the <br /> investigation to supply soil and ground water data to assist in selecting the l <br /> locations of the monitoring wells for the off-site phase of theAinvestigation.- <br /> 7 Although we believe this inVestigation has��been protracted "inordinately, we y <br /> agree to accept this phase approached investigation with the understanding <br /> that the results of the on-site phase,'. alo6g with a work plan for the off--site <br /> phase are to be submitted to us' and the San Joaquin Local Health -District <br /> (SJLHD) by 15 April 1989. We request that water samples be" collected from all <br /> the monitoring wells, and in addition to BTX&E and TPH analyses, 1,2-dichloro- <br /> ethane analyses be performed. -`" }: i �� <br /> In the off-site investigation the full extent' of ground water contaminated by i <br /> petroleum hydrocarbons is to 'be`-defined and integrated with the on-site work. <br /> The documentation is to be-,submitted as a revised PAR to us- and the SJLHD by <br /> 2,June 1989. The revised PAR -is to expand on the'Anformation presented in the <br /> 28 September 1987 PAR and- idclude all other necessary'. information as specified <br /> in my summary below and Appendix •A of the Tri-Regional Guidelines, pages A-9 <br /> through A-11 (Enclosed) t <br /> PROBLEM ASSESSMENT REPORT (28 September 1987)' `4"` �' � ' s ! <br /> The 28' September 1987- PAR- cannot 'be considered ;completeabecause the extent of <br /> the hydrocarbon plume was not defined. In addition, we ?have the following .t <br /> comments about the 'submitted PAR;that are to be` addressed in your revised PAR. <br /> '" - `� .y:' of < 1' r•.� - a r ...t t,,K + ' 4 i' <br /> 1 . All ground water wells within 2000 feet of this site!'.are to' bee > ; <br /> identified and shown on a well survey map:. One municipal well was• I <br /> identified in the 28 September 1987 PAR, but no mention was made about <br /> private domestic or irrigation wells. If no`private''domestic or x <br /> irrigation wells are located within 2000' feet of the; site, so state; '` <br /> i <br />