ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0004042 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' 1 Cwlogicd Technics Inc. Page 3 Sinclair Trucking Project No.: 1030.2 August 11,2005 3, 2003, Ms Duncan denied the request. A meeting was scheduled between Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair, Ms Duncan and Eric Price of GTI for March 27, 2003 to discuss the direction of the project and remediation alternatives. ' On March 3, 2003, Lori Duncan directed ST to develop a site conceptual model. In addition to the site conceptual model, Ms Duncan requested investigation of a potential NNW/SSE ' trending sand channel. GTI prepared and-submitted the Initial Site Conceptual Model on June 18, 2003. ' On June 24, 2003, GTI prepared and submitted the Monitoring Well Installation & GeoProbe Investigation Work Plan. Ms Duncan approved the work plan in the letter dated July 18, 2003, with several caveats. ' The followingwork performed was p ed rn accordance with the June 2003 Monitoring Well Installation & GeoProbe Investigation Work Plan. On November 12, 2003, GTI supervised ' the installation of one shallow groundwater-monitoring well (MW-5). To further investigate the lateral extent of soil impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons, GTI advanced ten (10) GeoProbe boreholes on November 10 and 12, 2003. On February 20, 2004, GTI submitted the Additional Site Characterization and 4`h Quarter Groundwater Monitoring Report discussing the work performed at the site in November 2003. On April 26, 2004, GTI prepared and submitted a Feasibility Study Addendum (Cost Comparisons). In a letter dated May 19, 2004, Ms Duncan, expressed concerns about several ' items discussed in the June 2003 Initial Site Conceptual Model and the April 2004 Feasibility Study Addendum (Cost Comparisons). ' After review of the May 19, 2004 SJCEHD letter, GTI met with Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair to determine the course of remediation for the site. The driving factor for Mr. and Mrs. Sinclair is time due to property issues with family members, making accelerated remediation at the ' site essential. It was decided during the meeting that excavation would be the remedial alternative that best fits the needs for the ST site. ' GTI prepared and submitted the Addendum to the Site Conceptual Model, Feasibility Study and Corrective Action Plan on July 12, 2004. In a letter dated August 3, 2004, Ms Duncan requested some modifications to the proposed corrective action plan. GTI prepared and ' submitted the final Remedial Action Work Plan dated September 20, 2004. In a letter dated October 4, 2004, Ms Duncan approved the proposed remedial action plan with minor caveats. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) denied most of the costs associated with the work in a letter dated November S, 2004. In a phone conversation on December 16, -- 2004, Mr. Trommer (SWRCB) stated he felt it was a groundwater problem and not a soil ' contamination problem. Mr. Trommer stated that if there was obvious soil contamination a reasonable amount of soil could be removed, but he thought 1,500 cubic yards was excessive. Ms Duncan agreed to the limitations on excavation and the work performed at the ST site is discussed in the following report. 1