Laserfiche WebLink
Memorandum <br /> June 28, 1996 <br /> Page two <br /> DTSC allocated funds to each of the three sites and issued <br /> task orders to contractors specifying tasks to be performed and <br /> budgets for each task. The City was not identified a RP; <br /> therefore, no task orders was issued on behalf of the City. <br /> However, in June 1994 , DTSC identified the City as a responsible <br /> party based on the results of the Phase I investigation. In June <br /> 1996, the City agrees to remediate the contaminated groundwater <br /> and reimburses DTSC on costs associated with groundwater sampling <br /> at the deeper aquifers (110 feet below ground surface) . <br /> Based on the task orders DTSC issued, staff found that the <br /> following contractors and activities are related to groundwater <br /> investigation: <br /> 1 . URS : prepared workplans to plan and design groundwater <br /> sampling, coordinate and oversee the groundwater field <br /> sampling work; and prepared final reports . <br /> 2 . Layne: Drilling and collecting groundwater samples at 16 <br /> locations . <br /> 3 . Chem Waste : Disposal of drill cuttings . <br /> Additionally, staff reviewed the URS 1993-1994 field <br /> sampling notes and found that, it took approximately 1 . 5 to 2 <br /> days to complete a hydroPunch (drilling, collecting samples and <br /> sealing the hole) . of the time spent approximately 2/3 of it was <br /> at the deeper aquifer. Accordingly, staff determines that 2/3 of <br /> the following costs should be allocated to the City: <br /> 1 . URS' s costs on preparing workplans and overseeing <br /> groundwater sampling; <br /> 2 . Layne' s drilling costs; and <br /> 3. Chem Waste deposal costs . <br />