Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Date: February 14, 2000 <br />To: Rich Muza, EPA Hydrologist <br />From: James Dillie, DMG Environmental Protection Specialist <br /> <br />Re: Suggested Revisions of your Clarification Letter, San Luis Project <br />I am including comments from Bruce Humphries and Harry Posey, DMG Enviror mental <br />Protection Specialist. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question I, sentence 3: They suggest including if nresent <br />after "possible contaminants". <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 1: They suggest including a sentence at the end of <br />the paragraph that says; This analysis does not sav or imply that such contaminant; exist. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 2, paragraph 3, sentence 2 you may want to <br />include "to the receptor" even thou¢h a contaminant source has not been observed in the Santa <br />Fe aquifer. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 2, paragraph 4: They suggest incluc ing a sentence <br />at the end of the paragraph that says; Aeain, the analysis does not say or imQlY Iha~. such <br />contaminants exist. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 3, sentence 1: it is suggested to include <br />"contaminants", if nresent, "are". <br />Questions and Answers; Response [o question 4, sentence 1: at the end of element number 2 you <br />may want to include ie. within 5 miles. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 6: you can include; junk yards, trash transfer <br />station, old gravel pit used as a landfill and fertilization of crops. <br />Questions and Answers; Response to question 7: They suggest including a sentence at the end of <br />the paragraph which says; Based on extensive groundwater and surface water mop: Lorin around <br />the former pit area [here is evidence for migration of some contaminants outside the~it area but <br />arsenic has not been detected outside the oit. <br />