SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

Cyeologkot Techtda lnc. Page 2 Cost Pre-approval Letter Project No.507.2 January 11,2006 • November 12, 2004- GTI submitted report on the pilot test to SJC EHD for review. GTI proposed additional ISCO in the recommendations section of the report as a viable remedial alternative. • June 27, 2005- In a letter correspondence the SJC EHD stated that the Regional Water Quality Control Board-Central Valley Region (RWQCB) must approve any additional chemical oxidant injection work. Further site investigation and remedial work were placed on hold pending concurrence from the RWQCB. • June 30, 2005- GTI contacted Mr. James Barton of the RWQCB via telephone regarding their requirements for ozone/peroxide injection. Mr. Barton confirmed that a bench scale (laboratory) pilot study would be acceptable to determine if the proposed injection would cause deleterious effects to groundwater. He directed that a work plan for the bench scale pilot test(BST)be submitted for his review. • August 8, 2005- GTI submitted our "Ozone Sparging SECOR Benchscale Test, July 18, 2005" work plan for approval. The draft plan was developed by SECOR's Mr. Angus E. McGrath, Ph.D. at GTI's request. • September 8, 2005-The RWQCB issued a letter stating their concerns regarding chemical analyses & methods and stated that the GTI/SECOR work plan was tentatively approved if their concerns were alleviated. The RWQCB wanted additional analyses of groundwater including general minerals, metals and demonstrated degradation rates. • October 28, 2005- After consulting with SECOR's Angus E. McGrath, GTI submitted a work plan addendum confirming changes to the SECOR BST that we thought met with RWQCB concerns. Specifically, it was our understanding from Mr. McGrath's conversations with RWQCB staff that analyses would be limited to hexavalent chromium, total chromium, bromate, arsenic, total dissolved solids (TDS), specific conductivity, and pH. • November 9, 2005- The RWQCB issued a letter stating that the GTI addendum didn't satisfy their concerns and that CAM 17 metals and general minerals would have to be analyzed pre-BST and post BST. They further stated that the work plan was tentatively approved if all analyses were included. • December 5, 2005- In order to comply with UST Cleanup requirements for three bids, GTI issued a request for bid from SECOR and Prima Environmental (the only two firms GTI could identify to perform the BST). The request for bid used the SECOR July 18, 2005 work plan as the base document with the stipulation that the study must include additional analyses for the CAM 17 metals and general minerals analyses as required by the RWQCB. At this point GTI awaited responses from the two BST companies. Since the issuance of the request for bids Prima Environmental submitted a bid (December 21, 2005) and SECOR has declined to bid. The reasons given by Mr. McGrath for SECOR's decline to bid is essentially that the changes mandated by the RWQCB are significantly more work than they are prepared to do for a BST. GTI is requesting a cost pre-approval from the UST Cleanup Fund for the Prima Environmental bid. We feel this is necessary because the original SECOR work plan BST