Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br />k <br />PqU l Iy <br />Z< THOMAS R. FLINN <br />DIRECTOR <br />,Foal+ <br />THOMAS M. GAU <br />CHIEF DEPUTY DIRECTOR <br />MANUEL SOLORIO <br />DEPUTY DIRECTOR <br />STEVEN WINKLER <br />DEPUTY DIRECTOR <br />ROGER JANES <br />BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR <br />Michael B. Wochnick, PE, Supervisor, <br />Closure and Technical Services <br />1001 1 Street <br />Sacramento, California 95812-4025 <br />5 <br />=_ `ifs, - .L <br />September 3, 2007 <br />P. O. `OX 1810 - 1810 E. HAZELTON AVENUE <br />STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 95201 <br />(209) 468-3000 FAX (209) 468-2999 <br />www.sigov.org/pubworks <br />SUBJECT: REFUSE BEYOND PROPERTY BOUNDARY <br />CORRAL HOLLOW SANITARY LANDFILL, SWIS 39 -AA -0005 <br />Dear Mr. Wochnick: <br />0 <br />M 6 <br />r <br />7 X00, <br />Thank you for your letter of August 9, 2007, and for your time on the telephone since then <br />discussing the presence of refuse outside the closure cap and property boundary at the closed <br />Corral Hollow Sanitary Landfill. <br />Ensuring that the environment is protected from the presence of refuse at the Corral Hollow Landfill <br />(and our other landfills) is of primary importance. A slight increase in nitrates at groundwater <br />monitoring well MW -4 (see excepted Figure 3, enclosed) prompted the regrading of the drainage <br />ditch along the eastern access road in 2003 and investigation of possible causes. It was under this <br />drainage ditch that we discovered lack of closure cap in late 2005; however, the impact to <br />groundwater at MW -4, if any, had begun to subside by early 2006, apparently due to the earlier <br />drainage ditch improvements. <br />These corrective investigations and actions were undertaken at the County's initiative out of <br />concern for potential environmental impact. <br />We acknowledge that the extension of the closure cap will require a revision to the Closure Plan <br />and Postclosure Maintenance Plan as noted in your letter, and we intend the preliminary <br />engineering design drawings and specifications for the construction of the extension of the closure <br />cap within our property to serve as the main content of that revision. The Postclosure Maintenance <br />cost estimate would also be revised. <br />Your letter also asked that the County provide a schedule for the completion of the site <br />investigation, submittal of design for the extension of the closure cap, and construction of the <br />approved design. <br />Site investigation was complete on August 17, 2007 when delineation of refuse and closure cap <br />within County property was completed. We were poised to proceed with design of the extension of <br />the closure cap, followed by submittal of draft design to the various agencies of jurisdiction. After <br />receipt of comments, we would complete the design incorporating those comments, issue a bid <br />and award a contract for construction of the remediation project. If third -party certification of the <br />closure cap extension was required, the County would assess its options in obtaining such <br />services. This work could be accomplished entirely under the County's authority within County <br />property. <br />