RE_ Suggested Materials for TAC - incl draft final FS Workplan with RAO ...FW_ D1712508 Item 10.1 Feasibility Study WorkplanFrom:Ivo Bergsohn
To:"Sachi Itagaki"
Subject:RE: Suggested Materials for TAC - incl draft final FS Workplan with RAO ...FW: D1712508 Item 10.1 Feasibility
Study Workplan
Date:Monday, October 22, 2018 11:44:39 AM
Attachments:081418_SouthY_obj+alts.pptx
2018 PCE contours.pdf
2024 PCE contours.pdf
E_draft_101818_Replacement_wells_Area_w_parcels_zoom_ownership_v3_ib.pdf
F_xsection.pdf
Hi Sachi-
Thanks for sending over the suggested materials; I took a close look at them this morning and have
some thoughts and material mark-ups (attached).
· FS Workplan/RAO Objectives Table
o May want to revisit Draft Table1 in order to address DFA Questions (attached)
§ Clean-Up Level: Based on discussions with DRI, it appears that Mass Removal
would be the best metric to use as it is easily measured with model. Should
be flexible to align with differences in Approach. Differing clean-up levels
would likely be developed for Well-Head Treatment vs. Replacement Well vs.
Mid-Plume Remediation.
§ Area of Attainment: Can this be most easily answered using a figure showing
the limits of South Y Plume Extent?; with regard depth this could may also
need to be flexible as clean-up levels may change depending on approach.
For example, Well Head Treatment may be most concerned with PCE
concentrations within Layer 2; Replacement Well may be most concerned
with PCE concentrations in Layers 2 and 3; and Mid-Plume Treatment may
be most concerned with PCE concentrations in Layer 1.
§ Remediation Time Frame: What is KJ’s timeframe for life-cycle cost estimates
to be used for FS?; DRI Model Time periods for Transient Predictive runs are
on the order of 50 years (2017-2066).
· Remedial Scenario Definition
o Attached is a .pdf of the 2018 and 2024 Model-simulated PCE Contours (lyr 1) from SR
for Handout C use
· Draft Replacement Well Map
o See my mark-up showing Colorado Test Hole site. If time available, may want to add
comment with site descriptor and location as done for RW-F.
· DRI Cross Section
o Could nor open .GIF; so I made a .pdf of what was provided by DRI (attached)
I have a meeting at 4:00 PM today; if available feel free to call me anytime between 1:30 – 3:30 to
discuss/finalize these items.
Ivo Bergsohn, PG, HG
Hydrogeologist
South Tahoe Public Utility District
1275 Meadow Crest Drive
South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150
(530)543-6204
From: Sachi Itagaki [mailto:SachiItagaki@kennedyjenks.com] Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 6:07 PMTo: Ivo BergsohnCc: Sachi ItagakiSubject: Suggested Materials for TAC - incl draft final FS Workplan with RAO ...FW: D1712508 Item 10.1Feasibility Study Workplan
Hi Ivo – Per your draft agenda – I’ve suggested some handouts (I couldn’t get to Handout C):
MOU Update (T. Carter)
FS Work Plan (KJC submit to Grant Manager) – see draft final attached (Handout A)
RAO discussion – how to address DFA comments would be helpful – see below
Remedial Scenario Definition Update (KJC/DRI)
PCE Contour comparison
Draft 2016-2018 field data (handout B) vs GW model PCE (handout C)
Draft Alternatives matrix (handout D – pdf of alts table only – updated to reflect
accurate reference to model layers)
Draft Replacement well map (Handout E) and DRI cross section (Handout F)
LBWC 4 replacement?
Draft Pumping for Capture
LBWC 5/Replacement LBWC 4/TKWC 2
Max pumping rates for capture and water usage
Approach to Modeling Remediation
Refer to PCE contour, discuss vertical integration and scale challenges
Propose mass based approach
Status of other items
Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment – under preparation
Public Meeting 3 (11/7/2018 – tentative)
Other?
I’m out of the office Mon am (I am on cell til 9 am, in a meeting til about 11:30, then likely available
after 1 or so- We can discuss first thing Mon am- Have a good weekend! Sachi
____________________________________________________
Sachi Itagaki, P.E., QSD | Principal, One Water Practice
Kennedy/Jenks Consultants
Direct: 650.852.2817 | Cell: 415.350.7803
From: Carter, Tricia@Waterboards <Tricia.Carter@Waterboards.ca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 1:23 PM
To: ibergsohn@stpud.dst.ca.us; Grey, Brian@Waterboards <brian.grey@waterboards.ca.gov>; Jason
Burke <jburke@cityofslt.us>; Jennifer Lukins (jennifer@lukinswater.com)
<jennifer@lukinswater.com>; Kirk Wooldridge (kwooldridge@tahoekeyspoa.org)
<kwooldridge@tahoekeyspoa.org>; Reeves, Robert@Waterboards
<Robert.Reeves@waterboards.ca.gov>; Rezvani, Ali@Waterboards
<Ali.Rezvani@waterboards.ca.gov>; Richard Robillard (RRobillard@tahoekeyspoa.org)
<RRobillard@tahoekeyspoa.org>; Turrubiartes, Salvador@Waterboards
<Salvador.Turrubiartes@waterboards.ca.gov>
Cc: Sachi Itagaki <SachiItagaki@kennedyjenks.com>; Lynn Nolan <lnolan@stpud.dst.ca.us>; Heidi
Baugh <hbaugh@stpud.dst.ca.us>
Subject: RE: D1712508 Item 10.1 Feasibility Study Workplan
Hello Ivo,
The Division of Financial Assistance (DFA) has reviewed the Feasibility Study (FS) Work Plan,
submitted on 13 September 2018, for the South Tahoe Public Utility District’s Planning Project
(D1712508). DFA has the following comments on the draft FS Work Plan. DFA staff has comments on
the Remedial Action Objectives and the data necessary to evaluate potential cleanup alternatives.
1. Page 1, Feasibility Study Steps –
Step 1, Data Review with Feasibility Study Kick-off Meeting –
Item B lists a number of recent reports that will be reviewed/considered when
preparing the Feasibility Study. Please include the report that summarizes the
groundwater analytical data from the Tahoe Keys Property Owners Association well
profiling event conducted in September 2018, if completed.
Item D identifies recent monitoring events conducted by other entities. Please list the
entities and monitoring event dates for which groundwater analytical data will be
reviewed/considered when preparing the Feasibility Study.
2. Page 6, Remedial Action Objectives (RAO) Table –
RAO 5 (Cleanup Level); RAO 6 (Area of Attainment); and RAO 7 (Restoration Time Frame)
RAO number five is specific to a cleanup level/objective. Please determine which
Proposition 1 metric of success (e.g., contaminant reduction, mass removed, etc.) could
l be achieved to satisfy this this RAO.
RAO number six is specific to an area of attainment. Please identify the project area
that will be addressed as part of the Project.
RAO number seven is specific to a restoration timeframe. Please identify an estimated
timeframe in which the metric of success in RAO number five could be achieved.
Other South Y Specific Objectives
Other objectives are listed in the table and can be deleted as they will be satisfied by
other tasks identified in the grant agreement and/or as part of implementing the
recommended alternative (e.g., preserve ability to recover response costs, preference
for beneficial use of any extracted groundwater resource, reduce costs for
groundwater remedial wellhead treatment to retail customers, perform community
outreach).
Thank you,
Tricia Carter
Water Resource Control Engineer
Division of Financial Assistance
Groundwater Grant Unit, Bonds Section
State Water Resources Control Board
P: 916.319-8259
F: 916.449-5655
Tricia.Carter@Waterboards.ca.gov
From: Ivo Bergsohn <Ibergsohn@stpud.dst.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 4:10 PM
To: Grey, Brian@Waterboards <brian.grey@waterboards.ca.gov>; Jason Burke
<jburke@cityofslt.us>; Jennifer Lukins (jennifer@lukinswater.com) <jennifer@lukinswater.com>; Kirk
Wooldridge (kwooldridge@tahoekeyspoa.org) <kwooldridge@tahoekeyspoa.org>; Reeves,
Robert@Waterboards <Robert.Reeves@waterboards.ca.gov>; Rezvani, Ali@Waterboards
<Ali.Rezvani@waterboards.ca.gov>; Richard Robillard (RRobillard@tahoekeyspoa.org)
<RRobillard@tahoekeyspoa.org>; Turrubiartes, Salvador@Waterboards
<Salvador.Turrubiartes@waterboards.ca.gov>; Carter, Tricia@Waterboards
<Tricia.Carter@Waterboards.ca.gov>
Cc: Sachi Itagaki <SachiItagaki@kennedyjenks.com>; Lynn Nolan <lnolan@stpud.dst.ca.us>; Heidi
Baugh <hbaugh@stpud.dst.ca.us>
Subject: D1712508 Item 10.1 Feasibility Study Workplan
Hi All-
Attached is a copy of the draft Feasibility Study Work Plan prepared by Kennedy Jenks Consultants
for the Feasibility Study of Remedial Alternatives to Mitigate Tetrachloroethylene Contamination in
South Lake Tahoe, CA (D1712508). As a member of the Technical Advisory Committee ( TAC), a draft
copy of this workplan is provided for your review and comment.
Please send your comments by email or embed them directly into the attached workplan, using
track changes. In order to keep this project moving, I ask that send your review comments to me by
rd
no later than Wednesday, October 3 , 2018.
Thank you again for your time and participation on the TAC.
Ivo Bergsohn, PG, HG
Hydrogeologist
South Tahoe Public Utility District
1275 Meadow Crest Drive
South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150
(530)543-6204
This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by Mimecast.
This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by Mimecast.