Laserfiche WebLink
<br />i <br />Lastly, TCC wishes to clarify the response concerning the missing <br />June 1991 full suite sample data for Site 115. In the 1991 AHR <br />response, TCC's response erroneously referred to the pertinent <br />sample sheet being attached, but the July 1 sample was reported in <br />the data. This sample was substituted for the June sample which <br />was lost, per discussions with CDOH. This was outlined in the CO- <br />0042161 DMR cover letter for that quarter, a copy of which was to <br />have been included for your reference, but was overlooked. TCC has <br />enclosed a copy of the referenced CDOH cover letter, and the <br />response in sum is as follows: In the last week of June 1991, a <br />full suite sample was collected at Site 115. This sample was lost <br />and a second replacement sample could not be collected until July <br />1 due to the time-lag with TCC being notified by the Iab of the <br />missing sample in conjunction with the timing of pump cycles. This <br />was discussed with CDOH and was deemed acceptable given that a <br />second sample was then collected later in July to serve as the <br />sample for that month. TCC apologizes for the confusion on this <br />matter, and we will strive to prevent a recurrence. <br />Should you have any questions or comments, please contact me at <br />your convenience. <br />Sincerely, <br />Mai~~ dleton <br />Environmental Specialist <br />