Laserfiche WebLink
I � <br /> Daniel Villanueva <br /> I, From: Nuel Henderson [EH] < nhenderson@sjcehd .com > <br /> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 11:31 AM <br /> (- To: Daniel Villanueva <br /> cc: Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> Subject: RE: Quick N Save #1 - Phone Conversation 03/11/2014 <br /> ;i <br /> Daniel, <br /> -� Just wrote most of that in the case narrative. According to my memory we discussed aspects of the installation of MW-5; <br /> AGE considering the screened silt interval part of the overall sand interval , but my concern that the reduced permeability <br /> (and unmentioned higher surface area of the particles) of the silt retards contaminant migration compared to the sand , so <br /> the coarser interval should have been screened to provide more contemporary information on what is potentially in <br /> migration . We then discussed in general terms the CSM with a shallower sandy interval around 40 feet bsg and the <br /> deeper sandy interval nominally 75-80 feet bsg . My concern is that the shallower sandy interval is not well characterized <br /> east of EI Dorado and I think it would save time and money to get some basic information on the interval, hard data to <br /> complement the CPT data , while further characterizing the deeper zone known to be impacted. You want additional <br /> deeper zone information onsite to assist relating the contaminant distribution observed east of EI Dorado to the source <br /> ` area. You proposed collecting soil and groundwater samples through the shallow zone during installation of the proposed <br /> deeper zone wells (nominally 75-80 feet bsg) and installing shallow zone wells in the initial boring if field indications of <br /> contamination are encountered, and then moving over a short distance to install the deeper zone well. This is acceptable <br /> J to me, but we should be working from a common CSM; to address these changes and conditions, I asked you to provide a <br /> work plan addendum that: <br /> 1 ) Provides a narrative form of the CSM identifying the intervals of interest; <br /> 2) Sampling soil and groundwater through the shallower zone to assess for contamination , especially in the <br /> shallower sandy unit; <br /> 3) Specifies that shallower zone monitoring wells to be installed if field indications of contamination are encountered <br /> and completing the currently proposed deeper wells (-75-80 feet bsg) in a separate boring; and <br /> 4) Describing the decision criteria for selecting the final screen interval for each of the wells based on field <br /> observations. <br /> We also agreed that the report of findings for this scope of work would include an updated CSM with revised cross <br /> sections. <br /> -i <br /> If I missed anything , please let me know. <br /> Nuel <br /> ` l From : Daniel Villanueva [mailto: dvillanueva(aadvgeoenv.com] <br /> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10 : 53 AM <br /> To: Nuel Henderson [EH] <br /> Subject: Quick N Save # 1 - Phone Conversation 03/11/2014 <br /> Hi Nuel, <br /> .I Thanks for taking my call this morning and discussing the offsite assessment work plan with me . I am looking <br /> over my notes and I am having a hard time figuring out exactly what EHD is requiring AGE to prepare for an <br /> it addendum to perform the proposed offsite assessment. Can you provide me with an email that lays out exactly <br /> what EHD is looking for in order to move forward with the offsite assessment proposed . <br /> Thanks, <br /> Daniel Villanueva <br /> Project Geologist <br /> t <br />