Laserfiche WebLink
TTIRS <br /> Ms. Devra Lewis <br /> Regional Water Quality Control Board <br /> July 3, 2002 <br /> Page 3 of 3 <br /> W-2. Thus, the decision was made not to use the data to calculate the hydraulic conductivity of <br /> the soil. <br /> Comment 3: The Report states that the radius of influence was out to monitoring wells MW-1, <br /> MW-2, and MW-8, but does not list the distances of these wells from the pumping well or the <br /> radius of influence at the varying pump rates. Board staff was unable to determine the distance <br /> of the pumping well to the observation wells from Figure 3-1, and the Report did not provide this <br /> information. <br /> Response 3: From pump test well MW-14, observation well MW-8 is approximately 106.5 feet <br /> west, observation well MW-2 is approximately 9 feet north-northwest, and observation well <br /> MW-1 is approximately 87 feet south-southwest. Observation points W-1 and W-2 are 5 and 10 <br /> feet to the south-southwest from pump test well MW-14, and observation points N-1 and N-2 are <br /> 5 and 10 feet to the east-northeast from pump test well MW-14. <br /> Comment 4: Board staff's 2 April 2002 conditional approval of the Work Plan requested that <br /> the Report "include a schedule for upcoming work and report submittals." The Report does not <br /> include recommendations, a proposal, or schedule for further work. <br /> Response 4: As requested, a schedule for upcoming work and submittals is attached to this <br /> letter. <br /> If you have any questions regarding this response letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at <br /> (510) 874-3057. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> URS CORPORATION <br /> Amy Breckenridge, P.E. <br /> Project Manager <br /> Attachments: Project Schedule <br /> cc: Margaret Lagorio, San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> Tracy Sizemore, Phillips Petroleum Company <br /> X:\x_env\_wastekPHILLIPS\PROJECTS\Stiickton\RWQCB\ptimp test responseKdoc <br />