CORRESPONDENCE_2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ff- This � �F 1, t�°remail from the Water Board is in response to the previous (above email) and states that the last correspondence that the Water Board has regarding the "Glass Landfill area" was back on 8 Dec 2015 about backfilling. The Water Board stated that typically, a request for closure document is submitted to them which makes the case for closure with supporting evidence of successful cleanup of the site requesting closure. It was stated that if the Water Board is to consider closure of the "Glass Landfill site," it must review the documents/information. The Water Board stated that it would be very helpful if the LEA or the Responsible Party could provide the documentation/information that their agencies are reviewing for closure consideration. _. ._,1,. del �'� lic --,,;. .. This email from AGE states that another landfill gas sample will be "supplied" to the LEA for "final evaluation" and that the previous "soil-gas landfill sample" analysis is provided. AGE stated that the additional areal extent of the investigation area is depicted (proposed) by trenches along the southern property parcel, directly west of the subject parcel (APN 198-120-09) and that AGE plans to trench next week and will provide notice to the LEA to inspect the findings. Comments: There should be a LFG report prepared summarizing the construction of the well (e. ., was a soil vapor point or a LFG well constructed and what was the screened interval?), how were air samples collected?, a summary of field monitoring, and summary tables of analytical testing of air samples (methane, fixed gases and VOC concentrations). This email correspondence states that AGE collected a second soil-vapor sample (1704858), from "under the area of waste glass handling or located within the scope of work area for major site redevelopment." AGE stated that as depicted in the attached data, no methane was detected at the "normal reporting limits" and "no significant VOCs were detected."AGE stated that they do not propose additional soil vapor sample collection. AGE further stated that they will submit a draft post closure land use plan this week for the LEA to review, based on the meeting with the LEA. The additional soil trench excavation schedule was indicated as still pending any comments the LEA has for the proposed locations; however,AGE is prepared to proceed with the approximate proposed trench locations. Comments: Attached data was not included in the email available for review. However, if soil- vapor(aka LFG monitoring/sampling) is being conducted, then there should be a summary report prepared presenting findings of the monitoring and sampling. It is not clear what is meant by "normal reporting limits." It also is not clear what is meant by"no significant VOCs were detected?" Does this mean no significant concentrations of VOCs were detected and what is the basis for this statement?AGE stated they did not propose additional soil vapor collection. Typically when LFG Ninyo&Moore 1 500 E.Louise Avenue,Lathrop,San Joaquin County,California 1 104690095 1 August 11,2017 5