Laserfiche WebLink
Donn L. Diebert • • <br /> Page 2 <br /> January 16, 1991 <br /> MEETING NOTES <br /> Following introductions, questions were raised by Cam Williams <br /> regarding the schedule for ground water remediation. Her <br /> questions centered on whether MCTC would reduce ground water <br /> remedial efforts during the time the retort area undergoes <br /> closure; per the 29 June 1990 MCTC Remedial Action Plan (RAP) , <br /> the retort area will under closure subsequent to the flush & <br /> treat action. Currently, the flush & treat action is anticipated <br /> to take 4 to 5 years. <br /> Tom Hickey addressed the issue and confirmed the two actions are <br /> independent. Closure of the retort area should not affect <br /> ground water remediation efforts. <br /> Other topics discussed included well construction/design <br /> specifications. Figure 2G-1 of the SPECIFICATIONS AND <br /> DOCUMENTS, for Ground Water Collection System, identified the <br /> use of centralizers. However, specifications for the placement <br /> were not included in the text. <br /> Questions were also raised regarding construction of monitoring <br /> tubes. The issue of concern was grouting of the annulus. It is <br /> uncertain whether neutron probe reading would be inhibited by <br /> the grout to the point where readings are of little or no use. <br /> Tom Hickey mentioned he will look into this matter further. <br /> Cam also discussed soil sampling plans presented in the <br /> Subsurface Flush & Treat Design and Specifications document. She <br /> noted an analysis for dissolved constituents rather than total <br /> concentrations were preferred by the Board. She did mentioned <br /> totals are necessary for health risk issues, however, for soils <br /> at depths below any excavation (or for soils not subject to any <br /> direct exposure scenario) , soluble fractions are of primary <br /> concern. <br /> Anticipated flows for both the pilot and full scale flush & <br /> treat were also questioned. Tom mentioned the pilot scale flows <br /> are currently estimated at 2 gallon per minute (gpm) with full <br /> scale operations planned at 15 qpm. <br /> A question from Tom Hickey regarding agency contacts for Public <br /> Participation was raised. His question focussed on the <br /> construction of electrical meter and equipment boxes. Due to <br /> PG&E requirements, meters (originally planned for subsurface) <br /> will have to be constructed above ground and at eye level. <br /> Additionally, the meters have to be in vandal proof boxes. <br /> These requirements necessitate construction of a fairly large <br /> structure directly in front of some homes. Tom was primarily <br />