My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WATERLOO
>
4648
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545864
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2020 9:08:54 AM
Creation date
7/21/2020 8:47:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0545864
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0004530
FACILITY_NAME
MARLOWE PROPERTY
STREET_NUMBER
4648
STREET_NAME
WATERLOO
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95215
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
4648 WATERLOO RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
002
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
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.
/
220
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
TABLE 1 -CHECKLIST OF REQUIRED DATA <br /> FOR NO FURTHER ACTION REQUESTS AT UNDERGROUND TANK SiTES <br /> Site Name and Location: Marlowe Properties,46�E. aterloo Rd.,Stockton, San-Joaquin <br /> County(RB 1i3902fi9) � <br /> Y 1. Distance to production wells for municipal, domestic, A 2008 sensitive!lreceptor survey identified 58 domestic <br /> agriculture, industry and other uses within 2000 feet of the site. water sups wells within the search area.'The onsite <br /> well was abandoned in 1993.A domestic well 250' <br /> downgradient ofthe Site was sampled five times from <br /> November 2008 to August 2010 and all results were non- <br /> detect. 11 <br /> Yr 2. Site maps, to scale, of area impacted showing locations of In Januay 1988, one 550-gallon gasoline UST was <br /> any former and existing tank systems, excavation contours and removed. <br /> sample locations, boring and monitoring well elevation <br /> contours, gradients, and nearby surface waters, buildings, <br /> streets, and subsurface utilities; <br /> Y 3. Figures depicting lithology(cross section), treatment system Site lithology consists of clay,silt, and sand to 100', the <br /> dia rams; total depth inves#igated. <br /> Y 4. Stockpiled soil remaining on-site or off-site disposal(quantity); Approximately45 y -of excavated soil was stockpiled <br /> onsite and tested;however, the available reports do not <br /> discuss the fate of the excavated soil. <br /> YD5. Monitoring wells remaining on-site, fate; Fourteen monitoring wells(MW--1 through MW--14)and one remediation well <br /> -1 will be properly abandoned. <br /> 6. Tabulated results of al!groundwater __ _ Depth to grouidwater vaned-frvm32'.to-92Lbgs-Groundwater flow <br /> direction was towards the northeast. Groundwater gradient varied from <br /> elevations and depths to water, 0.001 to 0.008 Wt. it ,i <br /> 7. Tabulated results of all sampling All data adequately tabularized in various reports, including closure report. <br /> and analyses: <br /> 0 Detection limits for confirmation , <br /> sampling <br /> �Y Lead analyses I <br /> 8. Concentration contours of contaminants found and those remaining in soil and The extent of the identified <br /> groundwater, and both on-site and off--site: contamination shown in applicable <br /> reports. <br /> ElLateral and El Vertical extent of soil contamination J } <br /> Lateral and ny Vertical extent of groundwater contamination i ! <br /> 9. Zone of influence calculated and assumptions used for subsurface remediation Soil vapor extraction was the active <br /> system and the zone of capture attained for the soil and groundwater remediation remediation. <br /> system" . 11 <br /> � r <br /> 10.Reports/information [Y Unauthorized Release Form ❑Y QMRs 46`from 1%93 to 8/10 <br /> FY1Well and boring logs PAR FRP EY Other C/o ure Report(4111) <br /> �l ;i <br /> Y:j 11.Best Available Technology(BAT) used or an explanation for not UST removal, over-excavation, SVE,and natural - <br /> usin BAT, attenuation. R <br /> Y 12. Reasons why background wads Minimal residual soil and groundwater dwater contamination remains on-site. <br /> tfainable using BATT <br /> ' Y 13.Mass balance calculation of substance treated The consultant es"tiniated initial TPH as 206gallons in soil and TP1� - <br /> versus That remaining; removed by SVE as 160,gallon s in soil. Mass estimates were not <br /> _ provided for roundwater. <br /> �, 14. Assumptions,parameters, calculations and The consultant did not conduct a soil gas survey;however,post <br /> Y1 used in risk assessments, and fate and remediation confirmation soil results did not exceed Region 2 <br /> transport modeling; commercial ESLs. Water quality goals have been reached. <br /> —y] 15. Rationale why conditions remaining at site Soil contamination reportedly is limited in extent. Land use <br /> will not adversely impact water quality, health, or (commercial)is not expected to change in the foreseeable future. Vapor <br /> other beneficial uses;and intrusion risk has been'addressed. <br /> By: JLComments:In January 1988, one 550-gallon gasoline UST was removed from the subject Site. Based upon <br /> I� <br /> 46 quarters of groundwater monitoring showing a stable plume which declined to levels below water quality <br /> Date: goals, the limited extent of contamination remaining in soil, no foreseeable changes in land use,and limited <br /> 5/26/2011 threats from soil and soil vapor intrusion, Regional Board staff concur with San Joaquin County's Closure <br /> Recommendation <br /> F <br /> ii i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.