SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

. Page 1 of 2 Mike Infurna [EH] From: Mike Infurna [EH] Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 8:08 AM To: 'Tim Cuellar' Subject: RE: Flag City Chevron I'm a lima c.; ;used here. Last I understood (approved)was first well destruction was to be GeoProbed and honeycomb destruction with grout added after and pressurized. THis is for the FIRST NON detect well and was to be considered a PRESSURE GROUT. Drill out by HSA was NOT approved and I requested an alternate method if the FIRST well destruction procedure did NOT work.THis alternative, WWT 50-grain wire line destruction was included in your/AGEs Oct 16, 2007 Proposal for Alternative Method to Decommission CMT Wells. I stamped approved this on Oct 18. with the condition a mushroom cap was still required and if this ALTERNATIVE did not work either, NO FURTHER WELL DESTRUCTIONS were to continue. I'm still waiting for the detailed work plan noted on page 2 of 2 of the Oct 16 document... I'm still under the impression that'honeycombing'the wells meets destruction requirements for the CMT wells, dirty or not, assuming it works. 50-grain wire line explosions will ALSO meet EHD requirements for well destructions, contaminated or not. so what's with your"over-drill"questions? From: Tim Cuellar [mailto:tcuellar@advgeoenv.com] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 5:14 PM To: Mike Infurna [EH] Cc: rmarty@advgeoenv.com Subject: Flag City Chevron Mike, In a letter dated 13 September 2007, AGE requested a variance to the San Joaquin County well standards in decommissioning wells at Flag City Chevron. In the letter, you approved some.............you denied some.........goes with the saying that you can't win 'em' all. In the above letter, AGE proposed to pressure grout extraction wells EW-1 through EW-10, and monitoring wells MW-1/2/4/5/6A/6B and 7 through 14. In your response letter dated 21 September 2007,you stated wells MW-2/14/15/17 & 18 are contaminated and MAY NOT be pressure grouted. You also stated any extraction wells that have contamination may not be pressure grouted. As you know,we have serious financial constraints for this project; USTCF funds have been exhausted and the Bokides family is footing the bill out-of-pocket.When all is said and done, there is an approximate savings of at least 2K per well if allowed to pressure grout vs. drill-out. I understand (to the best of my ability @)that wells with any MTBE-impact need to be over-drilled. However, based on your statement in your Sept. 07 letter, can I assume that pressure grouting of'ND' monitoring wells MW-1/4/5/6A/6B/7 will be an acceptable decommissioning method with SJ County. Additionally, ground water extraction well EW-3 is a non-detect well, and if acceptable, our clients would prefer to pressure grout this well. 2/20/2008