Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Mike Desso . - 2 - . 6 July 2006 <br /> 2. One soil boring was logged at each well cluster location to identify zones to screen <br /> subsequent wells. Each subsequent well was either installed in the logged soil boring or <br /> another soil boring drilled within 5 feet. Well construction diagrams are presented on the <br /> logs, which is very useful f9r review purposes and clarity of data presentation. However, <br /> it is unclear which of the wells were installed in the soil borings that were logged and <br /> which were installed in subsequent soil borings drilled within five feet, but not logged. <br /> Nestle should amend the soil boring logs included in the final Report to indicate whether <br /> or not each well diagramed was installed in a logged soil boring or a subsequent soil <br /> boring. <br /> 3. Nestle should include sampling field notes and laboratory reports for discrete <br /> groundwater samples collected during drilling of the soil borings. <br /> 4. Nestl6 has concluded that the replacement wells for impacted private water supply wells <br /> south of the Stanislaus River should be installed in the upper aquifer or in the lower <br /> aquifer below 300 feet. Nestl6 should proceed with the necessary water quality <br /> evaluations of these options to provide equivalent quality and quantity of water unpolluted <br /> by VOCs. <br /> 5. Regional Water Board staff does not agree with Nest16's conclusion that no further <br /> investigation or well installations are needed west of well cluster location M-32 on the <br /> north side of the Stanislaus River. Nestl6 cites as justification the fact that well cluster M- <br /> 35 and well M-37 are not impacted. However, these wells are southwest and west of M- <br /> 32, and both are south of the river. The VOCs are migrating towards the west in the <br /> upper, intermediate, and lower aquifers on the north side of the river and no monitoring <br /> wells are located west of M-32. The Regional Water Board believes additional monitor <br /> wells west of M-32 are warranted. <br /> 6. Nestl6 has concluded that no further investigation is required south of the Stanislaus <br /> River. Regional Water Board staff will evaluate water quality data to be collected from <br /> monitoring wells and private water supply wells during 2006 before concluding whether or <br /> not staff agree with that conclusion and whether or not additional assessment will be <br /> necessary south of the River. <br /> If you have any questions, please contact me at (916) 464-4675, or by email at <br /> jbrownell@waterboards.ca. oy. <br /> t <br /> es R. Brownell, P.G. <br /> ociate Engineering Geologist <br /> cc: Binayak Acharya, Environmental Cost Management, Inc. <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services, Public Health Division, Stockton <br /> Stanislaus County Department of Environmental Resources <br /> Matt Machado, P.E., City of Ripon <br /> Tom Hindman, Ripon Public Library <br /> Mike Owens, Fox River Paper Company <br />