Laserfiche WebLink
Agenda <br /> Stewart Property <br /> February9,1990 <br /> Page: 2 <br /> f 4. An extra 10,000 gallon swin_r,tank was installed and two carbon ' <br /> absorption drums were installed ready to filter the water from <br /> one lank to the next. <br /> 5. The site was cleaned and a fence.was installed surrounding the <br /> excavation. ' <br /> Additional site characterization was performed by redeveloping the three monitoring wells, i <br /> collecting ground water sample and measuring ground water gradient. The monitoring well <br /> data is attached as GT-18,MW-1 through MVV-3,and a map is attached showing,ground Ovate. <br /> gradient. <br /> ;i <br /> Geological Technics and SEMCO propose to widen the excavation about 5 feet to thQ westf-id <br /> up to 15 to 20.feet to the north to remove the remaining soil contaminated with p�etroleun% <br /> hydrocarbon. There still may be a thin layer of soil contamination above the water table that <br /> would not be cost effective to excavate. However,this is not thought to be a significant threat <br /> to ground water in the future. <br /> One major drawback is the cost for removing this extra material. it will not be inexpensive and <br /> the cost of the project as it now exists may push your current resources. The cost for the <br /> additional work is approximately for$ SEMCO, approximately $2,000 for analytical <br /> fees, and approximately $2,000 for Geological Technics' services. However, if this <br /> contaminated material could be removed at this time, it would make the ground water <br /> remediation much less expensive as the hydrocarbons may leach into the ground W-rter for years <br /> to come. <br /> As an interim remedial measure,Geological Technics proposes to pump out of MW-1 and treat <br /> the extracted water by air stripping and carbon absorption filtration. This work could be <br /> j performed cost effectively and could drastically reduce the overall cost of the ground water <br /> remediation project. The proper permits would be ebtained before this work proceeds. <br /> It is our understanding that the ground water contamination plume has not migrated very far. ' <br /> The reason for this is that approximately.6 months ago when the p!-elirninary site assessment <br /> was performed MW-I had extremely low hydrocarbon content. However, to date the levels <br /> have increased which means that the plume is migrating to the north. <br /> The main goal of this meeting is to obtain a decision from RWQCB on these proposals and get a <br /> definite direction to proceed so a budget can be established so that the work cap.proceed. This <br /> property must be put back into operation as soon as possible. It is a financial.drain and an eye <br /> sore. <br /> f <br /> 1 <br /> _i <br /> i <br /> : <br /> :i <br />