Laserfiche WebLink
Message Page 1 of 2 <br /> Mike Infurna [EH] <br /> From : Art Deicke [adeicke@advgeoenv.com] <br /> Sent: Friday, August 31 , 2007 10:26 AM <br /> To : Mike Infurna [EH] <br /> Cc: rmarty@advgeoenv.com <br /> Subject: RE: Nomellini <br /> Mike, <br /> Yes, the wording is very clear and understood; however, the GWsample from CPT-4 at 55-57 feet was <br /> ND for all CDCs. As a matter of fact, each GW sample (34 to 37, 55 to 57, 77 to 80 and 96 to 99) was <br /> ND for all COCs. <br /> My question is simply what is the "contamination found in water sample collected between 55 and 57 <br /> feet bgs in CPT-4" referred to in your letter dated 27 July 2007 . <br /> Now, CPT- 1 is another story. Seems the deep well should be near CPT- 1 instead of CPT-4 with reports <br /> of TPH-g, BTEX, TAME and 1 ,2-DCA at 96 to 99 feet bsg. <br /> Best Regards, <br /> Arthur Deicke <br /> Project Scientist <br /> Cell: (831 ) 402-5850 <br /> adeicke@adv geoenv. coin <br /> Advanced GeoEnvironmental, Inc. <br /> www .advgeoenv.com <br /> 837 Shaw Road 395 Del Monte Center, 9111 <br /> Stockton , CA 95215 Monterey, CA 93940 <br /> Ph: (209) 467-1006 Ph : (800) 511 -9300 <br /> Fax: (209) 467-1118 Fax: (831 ) 394-5979 <br /> ] . cilia fax _ tr - use's le oI the mtended r- p ttst and Silly contain cot d <br /> . enmr <br /> tial and Privileged in An, <br /> htunit Choi ized revten usa- <br /> dile f-tfolul e x d i S I I i bit it,n ki rth ; ema l Ia_e i s pi Olt Ilitcd 11 you it i e not the intended iecipiet, please cnmect the sender tx emaiVila x a rd dean oy all paper and <br /> eleco onie collies or die original manage. <br /> f <br /> ----Original Message----- <br /> f From : Mike Infurna [EH] [mailto : MInfurna@sjcehd.com] <br /> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10 : 17 AM <br /> To: adeicke@advgeoenv.com <br /> Cc: rmarty@advgeoenv.com <br /> Subject: Nomellini <br /> Art, <br /> I checked into your question regarding the area around CPT-4 and what EHD wants. <br /> { I'm confused here, since our letter of July 27, 2007, page two identified a gw concern at 55' to 57' bgs in <br /> 9/ 18/2007 <br />