Laserfiche WebLink
Former San Joaquin Cogeneration - 4 - 29 December 2020 <br /> Lathrop, San Joaquin County <br /> concentrations were generally detected in borings where waste was encountered <br /> beneath the former transformer area of the former power plant. <br /> • TPH-d was detected in three soil samples exceeding the SFRWB commercial <br /> ESL of 1,200 mg/kg with a high concentration of 2,400 mg/kg. <br /> • TPH-d was detected in two grab groundwater samples exceeding the SFRWB <br /> Tier 1 ESL (taste and odor threshold) of 100 pg/L at concentrations of 330 pg/L <br /> and 1,000 fag/L, however, the detection limit for nine grab groundwater samples <br /> collected in March 2019 was 500 pg/L, potentially masking the presence of <br /> concentrations of TPH-d below that level. <br /> • Dioxins/Furans were detected in all four waste samples collected, with two <br /> samples exceeding the SFRWB commercial ESL of 22 pg/g at TEQ <br /> concentrations of 64.5 pg/g and 96.6 pg/g. <br /> • Total lead was detected in two grab groundwater samples exceeding the MCL of <br /> 15 fag/L at concentrations of 17 fag/L and 370 fag/L. <br /> Regional Water Board Conclusions <br /> Central Valley Water Board staff generally concurs with the findings of the Report and <br /> has the following comments: <br /> • The waste identified beneath the southwest portion of the facility pavement has <br /> not been delineated. <br /> • Total lead exceeded the MCL of 15 pg/L in two grab groundwater samples. <br /> Dissolved lead concentrations need to be verified at locations were total lead in <br /> groundwater exceeded the MCL for lead. <br /> • Additional monitoring wells should be constructed to confirm groundwater <br /> gradient and to assess for the presence of PCBs, and dioxins/Furans <br /> downgradient of waste cells. <br /> • The downgradient extent of TPH-d in groundwater has not been defined. <br /> Groundwater samples should be collected downgradient of elevated <br /> concentrations of TPH-d identified in both soil and grab groundwater samples. <br /> • AGE had recommended excavation, removal and disposal of waste identified <br /> during site assessment activities, as documented in the 3 September 2019 <br /> Revised Site Assessment report. Remediation activities must follow the process <br /> provided in the 14 June 2019 letter from SJEHD providing the applicable Title 27 <br /> California Code of Regulations; Section 21810 clean closure process for the site <br /> which is defined as a pre-regulation disposal site. As outlined in the letter, the <br /> process includes site characterization, an Excavation and Materials Management <br /> Plan, and a final verification report documenting closure activities. <br /> • If other remedial alternatives, are being considered, such as capping and <br /> maintaining in place, a Remedial Action Plan needs to be submitted for review. <br /> The plan should include a conceptual model, remedial design, and a long-term <br /> operation and maintenance plan. Due to the nature of the waste identified at the <br />