SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

Ms. Lisa Brown October 26, 1992 Page 2 On July 23 , 1992, EHD received sample results from the product line sampling on June 10. All samples showed some level of contamination. On August 11, 1992, EHD received a letter from Dwight Davis of the Pegasus Group refering to the sample results from the pipeline sampling. Mr. Davis stated that review of W.W. Irwin's report (company performing sampling) indicated "we have no contamination of significance along the product lines" and "the groundwater in the general area of the tank is felt to be approximately 60 feet below sea level" . Mr. Davis further states "with these findings we would propose that we remove the contaiminated soil in the bottom of the hole where the tanks were buried , have the area re-tested and filled with clean rock and top soil. " Mr. Davis also requested concurrence from EHD with this proposal. On August 12, 1992, I phoned Dwight Davis in response to his letter dated August 7, 1992. I first addressed the contamination noted from piping closure in place. Mr. Davis indicated the levels are not significant and that Roy Austin of W.W. Irwin concurred with this. I stated I did not agree with the statement in his letter about groundwater being at 601 . He indicated W.W. Irwin verified that because there is some way the levee seals off pit area. Mr. Davis said the stockpile had been "taken care of" and now he wanted to excavate a few feet of soil from tank pit and "be done with it" . Mr. Davis further stated he felt we were "making a mountain out of a mole hill" . I indicated that he would need to contract with a consultant to submit a work plan to this office to begin the investigation/remediation. He stated he is "not going to hire another consultant" . I stated this office would not recognize any work done without prior approval of a workplan. Mr. Davis stated he would not do anything unless it is ok with EHD. I pointed out the sentence in his 8-7 letter stating they would proceed if they didn't hear from PHS-EHD. Mr. Davis stated the reason he said this is because he never received a resonse to his letter. (He did not indicate which letter, but I assumed it to be May 20, 1992 , of which a verbal response to this letter was made by Kasey Foley on June 11, 1992 . ) Mr. Davis stated the reason he wrote the 8-7 letter was to "put the ball back in your court", and he awaits a written response. I indicated our clean up unit is simply waiting for a work plan to be submitted to address remediation. He made a reference to it all costing way too much for something so minor. At this point I told Mr. Davis he needed to discuss this further with Margaret Lagorio.