Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Michael Collins <br /> August 23, 1993 <br /> Page 2 <br /> i <br /> in November 1992 to 430 micrograms per liter in June 1993) . As <br /> indicated in McLaren/Hart's July quarterly report, we believe <br /> that the recent rise in contaminants may be an anomaly or peak <br /> due to chemicals in soil dissolving into groundwater. This <br /> increase in contamination is not entirely unexpected because we <br /> have . had an above average year ofrainfall, especially in late <br /> spring. The groundwater elevation rose four feet between the <br /> November 1992 and June 1993 monitoring-.events, into the zone (25 <br /> feet below grade) where the soil contaminati.on.-has .been left-in <br /> While we believe that it is premature to discuss soil and/or ` <br /> groundwater remediation at this time, we are committed to <br /> cooperating with you and will solicit bids for the preparation of <br /> a workplan to define the extent of the contamination and review <br /> remedial options. However, T am requesting an extension to the <br /> deadlines outlined in your August 12, 1993, letter. <br /> I <br /> The client, consultant and I previously have discussed the <br /> concept of possible installation of a vapor extraction system to <br /> address soil remediation in the future, if necessary. Soil <br /> excavation did not appear feasible because of the depth to the <br /> contamination at 25 feet below grade. This is why we excavated <br /> the material placed in the tank pit, resurfaced and clean up the <br /> site. <br /> Among other things, we believe that one, if not two more <br /> monitoring events, are necessary to determine if the extent of <br /> the contamination has already peaked and is leveling off, or if <br /> it is continuing to rise. The next monitoring event is scheduled <br /> for September 1993. In addition to obtaining this information, <br /> soil remediation alternatives must be reviewed and the client <br /> should be' given sufficient time to prepare and bid' the project. <br /> The time frame you have established precludes. the client's <br /> ability to invite bids for the project, to analyze them, and to <br /> request revisions so that there are similar work products for <br /> comparison: (Often comparing bids is as impossible as comparing <br /> apples and oranges. ) Finally, after selecting a qualified <br /> consultant, the September 1993, date does not allow adequate time <br /> for the consultant to prepare and submit its workplan and safety <br /> site plan. <br /> With respect to the installation of groundwater monitoring <br /> wells, we do not believe that more wells are needed at this time. <br /> We believe it is appropriate to collect additional samples and <br /> address the source in the soil before requesting additional <br /> wells. <br /> F:\TRN\18498\C\B0ETTC92.BRB <br /> 10096-18498/cm/06/23/93/4 <br />