Laserfiche WebLink
STATE OF CALIFORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN,Governor <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAMER QUALITY CONTROL BOAR,:)— <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 ROUTIER ROAD s <br /> SACRAMENTO,CA 95827-3098 <br /> x: <br /> ,a <br /> 24 March 1988 <br /> Ft ptn r , 4,n5 ALT <br /> FEF I!T/S- <br /> ERV <br /> Mr. Greg Basso <br /> Forward Inc. <br /> P.O. Box 6336 <br /> Stockton, CA 95206 <br /> FORWARD LANDFILL SWAT REPORT, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY (CASE #2209) <br /> I have reviewed the Forward Landfill Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) Report <br /> dated February 1988 and cannot approve the document due to a number of <br /> deficiencies. The following comments/questions refer to the major problem areas <br /> in the report. <br /> 1. ` There are no 601/602 analyses in the SWAT Report. A batch of results <br /> containing 601/602 analyses was submitted on 11 January 1988 but since the <br /> samples were collected over a four-month period, these data cannot be <br /> considered to be a discrete sampling event. In addition, the analyses <br /> .skipped monitoring wells 8, 9, and 10. Page 4 of the SWAT Proposal states <br /> that the three deeper wells (8, 9, and 10) 'will be used to determine water <br /> .quality in the deeper permeable zones. A new round of sampling must be <br /> conducted for monitoring wells 1-10, analyzing for all of the parameters <br /> listed in the SWAT Proposal . <br /> 2. Where are the drill hole logs for VDH-1 through 18? <br /> 3. Table 10 gives results in mg/l and yet the lab reports in Appendix £ use <br /> the units of mg/kg. Which is correct? <br /> 4. There is evidence of ground water contamination that has not been addressed <br /> in the report, Lab results for a water sample collected from MW-6 on <br /> 22 January 1988 show that there was an unconfirmed detection of <br /> pentachlorophenol . TOC and TOX values are elevated for MW-1, MW-2, MW-4, <br /> MW-5, and MW-9. Forward needs to determine what pollutants are causing <br /> these elevated values. <br /> 5. An analysis for VDH-12 shows chlorobenzene at 0.6 ug/kg when the detection <br /> limit is 2.5 ug/kg. How can that be? <br />