Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Michael Kalish -2 - 2 March 2001 <br /> Staff has noted some errors incorporated in the cross-section presented by your consultant in the <br /> evaluation report submitted August 2000. These inaccuracies should be addressed with your submittal. <br /> Noted inconsistencies are as follows: <br /> 1. The cross-section shows a gas well adjacent to boring 1. The gas well is labeled as GW-1, <br /> however the map in figure 1 shows this as GW-2. <br /> 2. Ensure that the lithology for GW-2 is represented accurately on the cross-section. The lithology <br /> described in the boring log for B-1 is not represented accurately on the cross-section. For <br /> example clayey sand and gravelly sand units are shown as "gravels". <br /> 3. Lithologic contacts are misplotted as much as 4 feet using the vertical scale shown for the cross- <br /> section. <br /> 4. The cross-section includes silt at B-2 from 21 to 26 feet below ground surface,but this unit is not <br /> included in the boring log. <br /> 5. The cross section at B-3 shows a silty sand at the bottom of the boring, however the field <br /> geologist logged this as a silty sandy gravel(GM). <br /> 6. The groundwater level in MW-5 should be represented on the cross-section. <br /> These corrections are necessary to better interpret the subsurface units. If you have any questions or <br /> comments regarding this letter,please call me at(916) 255-3137. <br /> WENDY ARANO <br /> Associate Engineering Geologist <br /> cc.: Robert McClellon, RENS,Public Health Services, Environmental Health Division <br />