ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012646 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

�• w y ; . � 01 s a water sampling had b^en evaluated." GTI submitted its results on the re-sampling of groundwater to CVRWQCB, SJL11D and the district on December 9, 1987 . 12 On M-t. 25, 1983, the SJLHD indicated in a letter that the CVRWQCB would now be the regulatory agency reviewing this project and that the district could not proceed with assessment and remediation activities without prior authorization from CVRWQCB. 13 It was also made clear that SJLHD would still require local approval and permits forborings, monitoring wells, vapor probes, extraction systems, etc. On January 11, 1988, G.T.I. attempted to obtain a permit to continue site assessment, but was unable to do Cheir work since the county held their check and did not grant a permit. The county returned the check to G.T. I. on May 23, 1988, with a copy of the May 25, 1988, letter to the district explaining that CVRWQCB would be the regulatory agency in charge of the project at Lammersville School.14 Grou"dwater Technology Inc. presented a summary of action taken from August 26, 1988, through November 16, 1988.15 Again, G.T.I. requested authorization to develop three additional monitoring wells. In January, the district inquired. of CVRWQCB as to the delay in reviewing the November 15, 1988, report from G.T.X. it wag learned on January 10, 1989, that CVRWQCB had lost the report, but instructed the district to proceed with the recommendations of the G.T.I. report by Mr. Gordon Boggs. The district entered into a contract with G.T.I. to perform the necessary work for the three monitoring wells on January 30, 1989.16 On February 6, 1989, G.T.I. presented its assessment work plan to CVRWQCB for its approval to proceed.17 From February 6, 1989, through April 17, 1989, CVRWQCB did not review or grant approval to the assessment work plan submitted by G.T.I.18 On August 15, 1989, the district was informed that the San Joaquin County Public Health Services Environmental Health Division would now be the lead agency to review assessments and clean up activities at our site.19 On September 19, 1989, neither SJCPHS or CVRWQCB had granted authorization to proceed with assessment at the project site.20 After an eighteen month delay, from the da-.e G.T.I. received authorization from the district to complete their final assessment work-up to develop the Problem Assessment Report, three monitoring wells were bored on June 20, 1990, at the Lammersville School site. Analysis and report writing ensued. The Problem Assessment Report was submitted on July 16, 1990, by G.T.I. to the district and SJCPHS.21 Two and a half months later, the Problem Assessment Report was rejected in part due to improper sampling techniques as observed by Greg Lyon, EMS. Mr. Lyon was contacted upon receiving the letter of rejection and he confided that he observed the 4nappropriate sampling and said nothing to the crew as to the procedure. He said he wanted p, to see the results first before making any judgments. He further stated that he wanted new borings and samples as well as quarterly - - --- ---s-a------water-sam ling-from-the-monitorin 2 2 - p g we11s� Upon_-receipt--of-the-SJLHD- s�