Laserfiche WebLink
Pg. 3 , <br /> Bushnell 's report ( 1/31/92- pg.7.) , in which the presence of <br /> low level hydrocarbons were detected at MW3 (UST location ) <br /> but, as they. did not show up at the N.W. downgradient well <br /> site (MW4 ) some 130feet away, it is presumed that " . it is <br /> unlikely that hydrocarbons have migrated from the site" , <br /> without further anal si's of the other .documented direction <br /> of ground water flow ( viz . =the " vacant lot" ) which':. is just <br /> 10/15feet away from the pollution site in- a' N.E. direction ' ! <br /> 3 . <br /> Time frame of well monitoring-. My concern is naturally to <br /> secure both groundwator' and soil releases as .soon as possible <br /> to facilitate the ongoing marketing and development of this <br /> property. Mittlehausor ' s report of 3/12/94 pg 8 , seems to <br /> suggest end of 1994 as' being a possibility for cessation of <br /> monitoring, as the results of the last three quarters have <br /> shown non-detectable contamination . at the -well sites;„ However, <br /> your CERT Sales Release letter of 10/7/94 nebulously mentions <br /> 1995 . The Health Department' s position of maintaining the <br /> integrity of the well . sites in conjuction with the placement <br /> of MW3A (the critical one) is , in my opinion, a definite im- <br /> pediment to the marketing/development of the property, should <br /> this condition be allowed to continue after the 4th quarter <br /> monitoring period (i.e. Dec. 1994--the 1-st year anniversary <br /> of MW3A's establishment) . <br /> A recent phone call to Mr . Knoll (SJCPHD) has in fact revealled <br /> that his department generally requires two full seasons of <br /> monitoring before making an assessment as to when the site <br /> remediation is completed! ! It would appear to me that this <br /> site is indeed far from being " enviromentally" clean; an opinion, <br /> I am also sure, would be shared by any prospective lending <br /> institution, when asked for a loan committment! <br /> Until these issues can be resolved with the Health Department <br /> and your geologist, I consider your decision to regard this <br /> property as being remediated, to be somewhat premature. I <br /> would also think that any further testing of the site, outside <br /> of limited monitoring within an acceptable time frame, as being <br /> indicative of an ongoing obligation for rental payments as <br /> per the lease modifications of 5/24/92 . <br /> I anticipate my husband, who is a general contractor, will <br /> be in California in early/mid November, at which time he will <br /> make a physical inspection of the site. I also note that while <br /> you have included a compaction report and limited topo-survey <br /> of the regraded pad; I have not yet received, as was.JEpromised <br /> me, a plot plan showing the stub-out locations of the utilities <br /> at the property line, as well as sign offs from the city of <br /> Tracy regarding repairs to to curbs, sidewalks , et al . I would <br /> appreciate your obtaining these documents and forwarding them <br /> to as Boom as possible. <br />