Laserfiche WebLink
interim remedial action. We QOw that this area is impacted we are anticipating that <br /> this will provide us with a remediation well (from the standpoint of bailing SPH) . <br /> With regards 'to your suggestion of moving this well further east of B-32, we have data <br /> from 'MW-6, B-25 and B-29, and are planning to install another well between B-25 and B-29. <br /> We feel that ,the coverage of data we have and data we plan to acquire should be sufficient <br /> in this eastern section of the site. And, again, one of our goals is to begin removing <br /> SPH from the water table and we think this well will assist us in that goal. <br /> If you have any other concerns about this well I can call you to discuss directly. Thanks <br /> again for checking this out. <br /> Robert C. Foss, P.G. <br /> Conestoga-Rovers & Associates (CRA) <br /> 5900 Hollis Street, Suite A <br /> Emeryville, CA 94608 <br /> (510) 420-3348 office <br /> (925) 413-870.7 cell <br /> (510) 420-9170 fax <br /> -----OriginaV Message----- <br /> From: Jim Barton [mailto jbarton@waterboards.ca.gov] <br /> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:08 AM <br /> To: Foss, Bob (Robert) <br /> Subject: RE: RE: 1022 Frontage Road, Ripon <br /> Hi Bob, <br /> My concern is whether another well located 20 ' to the southeast of another proposed well <br /> is necessary to provide additional data, or would it make more sense to move it <br /> (additional well) further east of B-32? <br /> Thanks. <br /> Jim Barton <br /> James L.L. Barton, P.G. <br /> Engineering Geologist <br /> California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, 11020 Sun Center <br /> Drive, Suite 200, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 office (916) 464-4615 <br /> fax (916)' 464-4704 <br /> >>> "Foss, Bob (Robert) " <bfoss@craworld.com> 3/11/2010 9:12 AM >>> <br /> Thanks for your rapid response. However, the well she. had questioned (south of the fence <br /> line) was proposed in the CAP that you approved previously. Mr. Fetters of RFS provided <br /> her with a letter confirming that the property line is not the fence line and that the <br /> proposed well is on Jimco property. With that confirmation she has issued the permit for <br /> nine wells at, this point., <br /> The tenth well we are seeking your approval for is located near soil boring B-32 . The <br /> grab groundwater sample from B-32 contained very high concentrations of dissolved diesel <br /> (1,400,000 ug/L) likely indicating a nearby source and probably separate-phase diesel. <br /> I have attached a revised site plan showing the location of. this proposed 10th well. This <br /> well is located straight north of the word. PROPOSED in the title block, and just northeast <br /> of B-32 . <br /> Please let us know if you concur with this additionally .proposed well location since one <br /> of our objectives is to define the presence of <br /> separate- phase hydrocarbons at the site. Once we are able to provide your approval of <br /> this well to Vicki McCartney, she has assured us she will modify the permit to approve 10 <br /> rather than 9 wells. <br /> Thanks for your help with this matter. <br /> Robert C. Foss, P.G. <br /> 2 <br />