Microsoft Exchange Server;converted from html;
Thank you, Josh. Yes the Salem office is correct for all submittals associated with this site. I appreciate your prompt submittal of this report and will consider it timely.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Claussen
DEQ-Cleanup Program
4026 Fairview Industrial Dr. SE
Salem, OR 97302
Phone: 503-378-5074
Fax: 503-378-4196
From: Josh Owen
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 1:37 PM
To: Jennifer.CLAUSSEN@state.or.us
Cc: RICHARDSON Chris ; Jon White ; Marty Burck
Subject: 20-Day Report RE: Sweet Home Chevron LUST
Good afternoon Jennifer,
Our client forwarded a letter from you dated June 1, 2020, requesting a 20-Day Report for this project. The 20-Day Report is attached and a hard copy will be mailed. I assume that should be mailed to the Salem office. Is that correct?
Also, the letter mentions that the 20-Day Report should be submitted within 20-days from the date the leak was reported. Since the release report was backdated and submitted by Chris Richardson, it is already beyond 20-days. However, the report is being submitted within 20-days of being notified that the PHC concentrations detected in soil and groundwater would be considered a new release and not part of the previous release.
Please let me know if you need any additional information.
Thanks,
Josh Owen
Project Manager
Phone: 855 387 4422
From: RICHARDSON Chris Chris.RICHARDSON@state.or.us>
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2020 10:40 AM
To: Jon White jwhite@msbaenvironmental.com>
Cc: CLAUSSEN Jennifer Jennifer.CLAUSSEN@state.or.us>
Subject: Sweet Home Chevron LUST
Hi Jon,
I’m following up about the Sweet Home Chevron that has several USTs decommissioned earlier this year. The UST compliance staff sent the decommissioning report over to the LUST section for review and we’ve been busy so this got a little lost in the shuffle. After reviewing the information DEQ believes that filing a new release for the site was needed. I went ahead and filled out the release report with your information since you provided the decommissioning report with sampling info. I also back dated the release for to when you submitted the report so there won’t be any issues about reporting the release late because DEQ took a while to make that determination.
I know this might be a bit of a surprise so I wanted to provide some of the reasoning we used to make this decision. In reviewing the historic information there was significantly more gasoline contamination in soil at S6 than we historically knew about (outside of the previous LOF even). As far as I could see in the previous file, TPH was not sampled for in groundwater and with the 11,200 ppb detection at GW3 there is clearly some significant impacts. That location is also the farthest down gradient so it was never delineated.
Looking at the (B+T)/(E+X) ratio the GW2 and GW3 interpretation is that the fuel is about 7-9 years old. Given how coarse the soils are (cobbles in some old pictures) this should age fairly quickly but 7-9 years is much more recent than a release from the system upgrades that happened in 1998. These tanks had been in temporary closure beginning in April 2011, which is 9 years ago. The tanks remained in temp closure until this decommissioning according to Bill Brady. Since the site continued to sell gas after the previous release was reported and closed there’s certainly a possibility of a separate release.
In any case, based on the information more work would be required at the site to at least delineate the old release. It’s easier for us to start a new release for tracking purposes with the old files in archiver and certain amounts of storage space in the boxes, etc. The new release doesn’t have any negative effects for the site since there was already a release and an EES on the property.
I’m going to be out of the office for a while so if you have any questions about this please follow up with Jennifer Claussen who is copied here. Have a great long weekend.
Very Respectfully,
Chris Richardson, PE
Cleanup Project Manager
4026 Fairview Industrial Dr. SE
Salem, OR 97302
Office: 503.378.5045
OR# 93648PE