Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of 2 <br /> Mike Infurna [EH] <br /> From: Mike Infurna [EHj <br /> Sent: Tuesday,August 22, 2006 1:29 PM <br /> To: 'John F. Lynch' <br /> Subject: RE: Mr. Ed's Muffler/Cox and Cox-UPDATE-Project Information-595 E. 11th St. Site Code 1933 <br /> good work John., way to follow up on the pre-reqs <br /> I can't seem to find your email that refers to 1,2-DCA and EDB. These two constituents <br /> were noted in my June 27 letter and I'm SURE you've got it handled, that is, included in <br /> the next sampling events. <br /> I don't want to rain on your parade, but constituents aside, I would think your Vapor <br /> Intrusion (VI) investigation may pose a significant schedule-buster to your NFAR <br /> scheduling. With so many mobile homes so close, this site qualifies as a concern to <br /> residential occupants. but then again, the air space under each is a help too. <br /> In my experience with Tier 1 soil evaluations, most sites with any residual contamination <br /> left fail. Going to models to support your case is timely and uses the soil data you already <br /> have. It's been a while since any lateral soil investigation has been done at this site and <br /> only the old MW installation soil samples appear to provide data you can use in the <br /> models. Some times this 'old' soil data points a bad picture in the models. So I'm seeing <br /> consultants opting for newer soil data. This usually means additional subsurface soil and <br /> vapor sampling. This is taking longer than two QMs usually span. My point? these two <br /> 'last' QMs may NOT be your last two. <br /> I agree getting the lab data now can only help. But/and if you detect any level of <br /> significance with the new constituents you'll be adding to the QMs, additional <br /> investigation/delineation may be required. This could set back your QM/NFAR <br /> schedule. And if these new constituents DO show up and you have to step out and down, <br /> you could incorporate soil vapor sampling into the additional work. just a thought. <br /> a recommendation: run your paper vapor intrusion eval now. See what happens. Other <br /> UST sites that have failed the Tier I VI phase are collecting soil and soil vapor data to <br /> provide 'current' data to model or empirical data to support ND, if that's the case. <br /> Experience has shown me that from onset of work plan compilation for VI soil vapor data <br /> to EHD getting the report of findings is taking 6 months to a year...something you may <br /> want to take into consideration before calling these last two QMs your "lost". <br /> let me know your thoughts. <br /> 8/22/2006 <br />