ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0004581 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i } Geological T"hnks Inc. Page 2 Cardoza Project No. 662.2 a March 26,2003 On August 25, 2000, Ms. Laurie Cotulla, Program Manager, SJC PHS/EHD, informed Mr. Joseph Angulo of GTI via telephone that Ms. Heran had contacted the San Joaquin County Counsel's Office for clarification on our inquiry. Ms. Cotulla stated that Deputy County Counsel Ms. Deanne Watkins informed Ms. Heran that the words "recommends" and "should" contained in staff communications are in fact legal directives in the context stated above. With this information, GTI has since operated on behalf of our clients that all written correspondence from SJC PHS/EHD staff that contain "recommendation" and "should" are in fact lawful directives. Having explained this position, we would like to address your concerns (italicized) in your February 14, 2003 letter, and from your previous November 22, 2002 letter: 1. 2/14/03- "EHD...is somewhat taken aback that no discussion or evaluation of the various alternatives were included in the work plan to support the selected i investigative approaches. " Response: In GTI's October 8, 2001 "Soil and Groundwater Investigation & Risk Evaluation", GTI presented a site conceptual model and proposed a methodology 4 for achieving further site definition. SJC PHS/EHD staff rejected this work plan and subsequent addenda (dated November -30, 2001 and September 30, 2002) culminating in your November 18, 2002 letter correspondence. In your November f 18, 2002 letter you stated that a phased approach was warranted and included a "recommendation" for CPT prior to setting multiple monitoring wells. Mr. Henderson, when SJC PHS/EHD denies the straightforward installation of monitoring wells and recommends that CPT be performed first there is no need to discuss alternatives since SJC PHS/EHD has already selected the approach (CPT). ' As stated above, County Counsel has stated that your recommendations are lawful directives. We are respecting that position and are cutting to the chase without further ado. ' 2. 2/14/03- "EHD recommended, not mandated, a phased approach" Response: As stated above, San Joaquin County Counsel has stated that staff recommendations are lawful directives. 3. 2/14/03- "While EHD raised the concern that the screens in ...MW-1, 2 & 3...are providing vertical conduits for contaminant migration to deeper zones...EHD LUwants to consider GTI's professional opinion on the matter. "