WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Michael Harris From: Brasher, Bill@Waterboards <Bill.Brasher@Waterboards.ca.gov> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 12:56 PM To: Dixon, Kenneth Cc: Cohen, Matthew@Waterboards; Michael Harris Subject: FW: Barrera's Market - Proposed Assessment SOW Attachments: Barrera's Market SOW.pdf CAUTION:This email originated from outside of Redhorse. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Kenny, As we discussed during our last stalled case check-in, I contacted Alan Buehler about the Barrera's Market case Region 5S recently asked us to add to the priority list. Recall this is the case that they opened as a LUST case, but there are no definitive records of there being USTs at the site. And even if there were USTs,there are no records of the USTs ever being removed. Anyway, I explained to Alan the difficulties of getting this case into any of the Cleanup Fund programs without any records of USTs. I told him you might be willing to use EPA grant funding to sponsor a geophysical search for USTs. We also discussed a potential scope of work for investigation that might satisfy the RB enough to close the case. I asked Alan to summarize what that SOW would look like, which he did,with concurrence from Steve Meeks and Galvin Kaufman (who appears to be Chris Flower's replacement). I thought you might want to have Redhorse or Adanta look at the SOW to estimate a cost to perform it. Let me know if you have any questions. We can also discuss it further during our next check-in next week. Thanks. Bill Brasher California State Water Resources Control Board (916) 341-5871 E-mail: Bill.Brasher@waterboards.ca.gov From: Buehler,Alan@Waterboards<Alan.Buehler@Waterboards.ca.gov> Sent:Thursday, May 13, 2021 1:48 PM To: Brasher, Bill @Waterboards<Bill.Brasher@Waterboards.ca.gov> Cc: Kauffman, Galvin@Waterboards<Galvin.Kauffman@Waterboards.ca.gov> Subject: Barrera's Market- Proposed Assessment SOW Bill - FYI: Steve has hired Galvin Kauffman to fill Chris Flower's Sr. position. I put together a SOW that would be the most cost efficient in terms of checking LTCP criteria boxes. I ran this SOW by Galvin, and he concurs. As you and I have discussed, I believe GPR would be beneficial. If nothing is found with GPR, I believe that 5 borings would be sufficient to check all the necessary LTCP criteria boxes, assuming positive results. Boring 1 on the attached map in the vicinity of MW-7 would be only soil to 25 ft bgs. Highest groundwater concentrations in 2009 borings were in the vicinity of MW-7. The historical high TPHg concentration in MW-7 spiked when depth to water increased to around 26 ft bgs. Boring 2 is located in the vicinity of the fuel dispenser identified on a historical septic system permit map. The most recent measured depth to 1