Laserfiche WebLink
Antonia K. J. Vorster -2- 8 December 1988 <br /> 4. The report states that monitoring wells were developed by "water surging" . <br /> This process needs to be described . It is also stated that purging was <br /> accomplished in two-inch monitoring wells using a centrifugal pump. This <br /> also needs to be verified and explained . <br /> In conclusion, the June 1988 report proposed installing eight monitoring wells <br /> (six shallow, two deep), a minimum of twelve soil borings, collecting monitoring <br /> well water levels, and analysis of soil and ground water samples. Additionally, <br /> our 4 August memorandum required investigating the hide processing area for <br /> contamination sources, sampling and proper abandonment (if necessary) of the two <br /> old production wells on-site, and implementing a method (geophysics, additional <br /> soil borings, suction lysimeters, etc. ) to determine if the existing ponds are <br /> contributing to the ground water contamination. The work actually performed <br /> consisted of installation of six monitoring wells (five shallow, one deep) , <br /> collection of water level data, and ground water analyses. None of the additional <br /> work required by our 4 August memorandum was completed. <br /> Most importantly, the submitted report proposed no additional work to complete the <br /> investigation or address the problems outiined` in my above comments. After each <br /> phase of work is completed, the resultant data should be fully interpreted, <br /> conclusions drawn, and additional work ( if any) indentified . All of this, <br /> including the data and field descriptions, should be submitted in a complete <br /> report. Thus, Southwest Hide needs to revise the submitted report to include the <br /> information omitted , interpret the results, and propose additional work as <br /> discussed in the above comments. <br /> GAR:ej <br />