Laserfiche WebLink
Adrienne Ellsaesser [EH] <br /> From: Adrienne Ellsaesser [EH] <br /> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 1:56 PM <br /> To: James Myles [CC] <br /> Cc: Donna Heran [EH] <br /> Subject: Former Busy Bee Cleaners in City of Lodi <br /> Attachments: SJC%Well%Standards.pdf <br /> Hi Mark, <br /> I have a situation that Donna thought you should be made aware of.The former Busy Bee Cleaners clean-up site is the <br /> dry cleaner PCE plume in the City of Lodi. The site meets the requirements for closure and Regional Board is now closing <br /> the site. As part of the site closure, the 91 monitoring wells used for investigating and remediation of the site require <br /> destruction.The destruction permit that the consultant submitted was for pressure grouting all 91 wells. I <br /> requested analytical data that indicated all wells are non-detect for PCE contaminants, so the permit could be issued. I <br /> was sent water analysis that indicated 10 monitoring wells tested with detectable levels of PCE and required over- <br /> drilling of the wells to meet our destruction Standards. I requested additional data for the remaining wells. That is <br /> when the consultant for the site, Phil Goalwin sent the email below stating over drilling the wells was essentially a deal <br /> breaker and the wells may never be destroyed if that is what our Department was requiring. (If you start at the bottom <br /> of this email train, it will bring you up to speed with our situation.) <br /> Since December 27, 2013,we finally received information on the PCE plume location and current concentrations from <br /> Phil Goalwin and Regional Board. Our Registered Geologist evaluated the data yesterday and has determined that of the <br /> 91 wells that will be destroyed,46 of these wells require over drilling destruction methods and the remainder may be <br /> pressure grouted, per our San Joaquin County Well Destruction Standards (attached see page 27, Section 13.17.6). <br /> Before we explain to them we will be requiring the over-drilling of 46 wells, we like to know if you have a legal opinion <br /> concerning the comment Phil Goalwin made below concerning the Federal Court in Sacramento. <br /> ..."If over-drilling of the wells is going to be a requirement, then the parties must re-negotiate the funding and get this <br /> approved by the Federal Court.There is little to no chance that the parties will agree to the extra costs and therefore <br /> will have to go before the Federal Court to have them decide.This could take many months, if not years. Meanwhile, the <br /> wells will remain open and the site will not receive closure." ... <br /> We hope to let the consultant know of our requirements for issuing the destruction permit next week, but would like to <br /> hear back from you first. <br /> Thanks for your help. Call me if you need additional information. <br /> Adrienne <br /> Adrienne Ellsaesser, REHS <br /> Program Coordinator <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> 1868 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton , CA 95205 <br /> Ph (209) 468-0343 <br /> Fax (209) 468-0341 <br /> aellsoesser@s icehd.com <br /> i <br />