Document 700mneEg6n0aayV689bGa57Bj

AR226-2357 /y Andrew S Hartten ""'"" 02/20/2004 10:46 AM To: cc: Subject: Mark Houlday/AE/DuPont@DuPont Re: Proposed Monitoring Locations-Need to Discuss Please print, thanksl -------------------- Forwarded by Andrew S Hartten/AE/DuPont on 02/20/2004 10:50 AM -------------------------- "Steve Williams" <steve.williams@epa.state.oh.us> on 02/19/2004 05:46:26 PM To: cc: Subject: <Libelo.laurence@epamail.epa.gov>, Andrew S Hartten/AE/DuPont@DuPont Re: Proposed Monitoring Locations-Need to Discuss Andrew and Laurence, Unfortunately, my schedule will not allow me to attend or tie in by phone to the meeting on February 26. I have to make a court appearance tor another facility on that day. I am available for a cont. call next week on Monday, Tuesday afternoon, or Wednesday. I have begun to review the locations for sampling air, soil and ground water in Ohio as proposed by Dupont submission on February 4, 2004. I do have some preliminary comments and questions regarding the proposal. My preliminary comments reflect shifting the locations of several proposed samples, however, adding to the proposal may be preferable. 1. OH-P-6 (OS-McKown) is a proposed private water source monitoring location. C-8 was detected in this well at a relatively low concentration (0.973 ug/L) as were the wells near by. As an alternative, (or in addition) I recommend sampling the Kidder well (OS-KidderEM) , located approximately 2000 feet south of OS-McKown. C-8 was detected at 4.15 ug/L in the Kidder well and private water sources near by ranged from .289 ug/L to 7.29 ug/L. The Kidder well is a non-drinking water well used for outdoor purposes. 2. It may make sense to shift the location of air and soil samples (OH-A-l and OH-S/B-2, respectively) to a Location near the Kidder well. The ground water data and the air model appear to predict higher C-8 concentrations in this area, as opposed to the Mckown well location. 3. The reason for sampling air and soil/biota at locations OH-A-5 and OH-S/B-10 is unclear. Would it make sense to shift.OH-A-5 to a location near OH-S/B-9? This would provide 3 air monitoring locations in the main direction of the prevailing winds. Soil/biota sample OH-S/B-10 could be shifted to locations near private water sources OH-P-9 or OH-P-8. OH-P-9 and OH-P-8 or located in an area which appears to receive- higher concentrations of C-8 via air emissions then the location at OH-S/B-10. Additional Question for Andrew: 1. Location OH-P-7 is a drinking water well WWK-D ParsonsCF. While I have always assumed this well exists. Appendix A of the One-Mile Radius Survey and C-8 Sampling Report indicates the ParsonsCP sample was not collected because the well was not accessible. Can you check and verify? 2. Could I get 3 hard copies (24 by 36) of Figure 2 Two Mile Radius Detailed C-8 Results. This is the same map that was sent to me electronically on February 2, 2004. My hard copy of this figure is missing some data i.e. Casto. EXP000175 Steve Williams Hydrogeologist, Ohio EPA (740)380-5221 > "Andrew S Hartten" <Andrew.S.Hart ten@usa.dupont.com> 02/16/04 03:35PM > Laurence and Steve, Is there any possibility we can arrange a time to discuss the proposed offsite (WV and Ohio) monitoring locations? I was thinking it may be nice to have some discussion prior to the next FP Monitoring WG meeting on Feb. 26. I'm assuming a conf call would be the most practical way to meet, but I are willing to meet face to face in DC the day before (Feb. 25) i that fit your schedules. I am assuming you both have a copy of the submission made two weeks ago that displayed the locations and provided additional detail behind the specific proposed locations. This submission would form the basis for our discussion. Thanks.... Andrew This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail, in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for transfers of data to third parties. Francais Deutsch Italiano Espanol Portugues Japanese Chinese Korean http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email disclaimer.html - C.htm EXP000176