Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of 2 <br />Margaret Lagorio [EH] <br />From: Robert Traylor [roberttraylor@cox.net] <br />Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 3:03 PM <br />To: 'Duncan Austin'; Margaret Lagorio [EH] <br />Cc: Kitty.Walker@ci.stockton.ca.us; 'Mary Serra' <br />Subject: RE: Stockton Union Pacific Railroad Project <br />Thank you for your quick response to our request to proceed with the work at Stockton UPRR. Your willingness <br />to stay late on Wednesday and address our request has been greatly appreciated. Margaret has been in contact <br />with us and has provided approval of the permits for the geoprobe soil/hydropunch work. The geoprobe work will <br />be starting Monday, August 14th. <br />Thanks again, <br />Rob Traylor <br />From: Duncan Austin [mailto:daustin@waterboards.ca.gov] <br />Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 5:00 PM <br />To: mlagorio@sjcehd.com <br />Cc: Kitty.Walker@ci.stockton.ca.us; roberttraylor@cox.net; Mary Serra <br />Subject: Stockton Union Pacific Railroad Project <br />Dear Margaret: <br />I was contacted today by Rob Traylor of Golden State Environmental who works for the <br />Stockton Redevelopment Agency. He asked me to let you know whether we were in <br />concurrence with the geoprobe work proposed in their work plan for the UP Railroad project <br />area. He indicated that they have the geoprobe equipment lined up for next week and that <br />they need an expedited response from us. <br />In order to accommodate him, I have reviewed our previous comments on the work plan and <br />Golden State's response for the geoprobe element of the work only (not monitoring wells or <br />other work). We requested additional background samples and they responded that there is <br />adequate data already available for the area from other investigations. While this remains to <br />be seen, I don't think that we need to stop the investigation until we have resolution on this <br />issue. If we later find that there is insufficient background data, we can either obtain more <br />data later or make conservative assumptions. Our comment on the Hydropunch groundwater <br />grab samples involved making corrections so the work plan text and figures are consistent. <br />In sum, we have no objections to Golden State proceeding with the geoprobe work as <br />proposed in the revised work plan. We will be reviewing the remainder of the document in the <br />near future. Thank you for your attention to this matter. <br />Duncan Austin, P.E. <br />Chief, Private Sites Cleanup Unit <br />Central Valley Regional Water <br />8/14/2006