Laserfiche WebLink
Mike Infurna [EH] <br />From: Wendy Cohen [CohenW©rb5s.swrcb.ca.gov ] <br />Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 4:02 PM <br />To: treconsulting@comcast.net <br />Cc: Ton Vorster; Mike lnfurna [EH]; Margaret Lagorio [EH] <br />Subject: Re: Closure Status of Monitoring Wells (MW-1-4)forMetropolitan Stevedore Company <br />Jay, <br />I've spoken with my supervisor, Ton Vorster, and need to modify my last <br />message to you. We do not want the monitoring wells abandoned at all. <br />Since there has been a significant increase in sulfate over the past <br />decade, a future investigation and cleanup may be necessary, so the <br />wells should stay in place. This week, I left another message for the <br />Port's environmental manager to discuss this, but I have not yet heard <br />back from him. <br />We will be preparing a letter to Metropolitan Stevidore next week <br />stating this and will send a copy to the Port. I'll be in next week, <br />Mon-Wed, if you'd like to call and discuss this further. <br />Wendy L. Cohen, P.E. <br />Chief, Private Sites Cleanup Unit <br />Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board <br />(916) 255-3075 <br />cohenw@rb5s.swrcb.ca.gov <br />>>> "Jay R. Jahangiri" <treconsulting@comcast.net> 11/07/03 01:10PM <br />>>> <br />Hi Wendy: <br />Thank you for getting back to me on this project. <br />On behalf of Metropolitan Stevedore Company (MSC) and as was <br />clearly and <br />amply documented in our ground water sampling and analysis report <br />(SAR), and <br />the baseline groundwater investigation, there were both pre-existing <br />sulfate <br />concentration in soil and historical activities by other entities <br />pre-dating <br />and contemporaneous to MSC's activities that have handled materials <br />that <br />could have sulfate impact to the soil and ground water. <br />The very fact that sulfate pre-existed in soil at 9,400 mg/Kg ( <br />0.94% <br />of sulfate) and sulfur also pre-existed at 1,270 mg/kg at MW-2B (10 <br />feet <br />depth) again shows pre-existing contamination prior to MSC's <br />operations. <br />The responsibility of additional investigation if any, falls upon <br />the <br />landowner or some other responsible party (RP) except MSC to decide as <br />to <br />who is responsible for this pre-existing contamination/condition and <br />investigate to what extent has this sulfate desorbed from the soil <br />column <br />into the aquifer. <br />In view of the above, simply stated, MSC believes that it has done <br />1