TECHNICAL REPORT ON GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION · 2021. 6. 24. · e finish .-29-84 proj. no...

TECHNICAL REPORT TO BOVANO INDUSTRIES

ON GROUND WATER INVESTIGATIONS

{(CvtSC-

Frederick W, Johnson; Project Manager Glenn Daukas; Assistant Geologist

TRC Project No. 2661-N51 July 13, 1984

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Introduction • . 1

2.0 Well Installation 3

3.0 Ground Water Sampling 3

4.0 Discussion 4

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

1 General Site Map-Bovano Industries, Cheshire, CT 2

1A Site Elevation Map 2

APPENDICES

1 Connecticut Test Boring Monitor Well Logs 2 Monitoring Well Construction Details 3 South Central CT Regional Water Authority Monitoring Well

Water Sample Results

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In response to a stipulation by the Superior Court, Judicial District of

Hartford on May 22, 1984, Bovano Industries was required to install two

monitoring wells at their facility located at 830 South Main Street, Cheshire,

Connecticut.

The location of the wells {Figures 1 and la) were specified by the Court

and were required as a result of a legal order of abatement, issued on April

30, 1982, from the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. The

order was a result of suspect contribution to contamination of the ground

water of the state from a copper sludge basin operated by Bovano, and from

spillage of trichloroethylene used in a manufacturing process at Bovano.

On May 25, 1984, TRC, under contract with Bovano Industries, directed the

installation of the wells using the services of Connecticut Test Borings, Inc.

of Seymour, Connecticut.

-1

_ L L ,b

" w F C , u - - . ^ i » f F _ r u L,M„"G

;L|DGF i mom

PROCE& 173. 175.3

\ v " 5 ^ ' TC-ljBf?-i

V WVR ; * *#* VSUPPLY/ , C - ^

\ WELL -̂

^ C . %

.4

PARKINGW

^-i \

\t v1° SERtlj

II itAOhlNfi''

15S.J

GD-164

AREA

^ . 5

WELL F GDH63.01' \

4lELD /ed"

.55,58 TC-16^86'

BLOG; <Ji <WE

-s~ ro't

"j-> / / W E L L D

161.7* r̂v\-^

164.4

/S0.5

\ \ 97EXISTING ffa

V '•- •162., z 159.1 y 154.5 Y

' .5 ') .X

75fi J

V bJ / 5 ^ ' 160.8

V (f) /5^<

159.8 *

^ x

•' - .V IP* ..------A „•. ^

,/&?.& / / f •. • //A.--^I70A

<?a<?

/ / i ///in &

Figure la . Site Elevations' - Bovaho Industries, Cheshire, Connect

• •

f 2.0 WELL INSTALLATION

I Under the supervision of a TRC geologist, the wells were installed using a

I truck mounted auger rig equipped with a four-inch inside diameter hollow stem

auger. Split spoon samples were collected at five foot intervals and logged

by the TRC geologist which are presented by Connecticut Test Borings, Inc.

(Appendix 1). The location of the two monitoring wells are at the southeast

! corner of the factory, Well F, and the center of the south face of the office

building, Well E (Figures 1 and la). Well construction consists of 2" PVC

solid well riser with 15' of perforated well screen in Well E and 25' of

screen in Well F. The screen was covered with filter fabric to prevent

infiltration of suspended solids. A bentonite seal was placed at a depth of

approximately one foot above the top of the well screen and a locking

protective steel casing was cemented into place at the ground surface creating

an impervious seal (Appendix 2). Four backhoe dug wells had previously been

installed on September 21, 1982 by TRC with Bovano's equipment and operator.

Between that date and May 25, 1984 monitoring Well C (Figure 1) was destroyed

by snow removal operations.

;

3.0 GROUND WATER SAMPLING

Ground Water samples were collected on June 19, 1984 and analyzed on June

20, 1984 by the South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority, New Haven,

{Connecticut. The results are listed in Appendix 3. On July 3, 1984 ground

surface, top of casing and water table elevations were determined by TRC with

the help of a Bovano employee (See Figure la).

4.0 DISCUSSION

The results of the elevation survey shows ground water flow to be in a

southeasterly direction with a flow gradient of 0.002 ft/ft (See Figure 1A).

Of the five wells sampled, monitoring Wells A and B showed trichloroethylene

(TCE) levels of 50 ppb and 34 ppb respectively, which are above the

Connecticut Department of Health level of 25 ppb for potable water. TCE was

not detected in monitoring Wells D, E, and F. (Appendix 3).

In September of 1982 TRC conducted a sampling round of the existing

backhoe wells. A comparison of the results of this sampling round and the

June 1984 round show that trichloroethylene levels in Wells B and D have

: dropped significantly. During the 1982 sampling round Well A was only

analyzed for copper, therefore no comparison can be made.

I

I 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AMD RECOMMENDATIONS

Based upon the results of this technical evaluation and TRC's September

1982 report to Bovano TRC feels that Bovano has satisfied the requirements of

the May 22, 1984 Stipulated Judgement (Appendix 4) from the Connecticut

i Department of Environmental Protection. Specifically, the items outlined in

;! the Stipulated Judgement have been addressed as follows:

ITEM 1: The two additional wells have been installed as detailed in this report.

ITEM 2: TRC's September 1982 report to Bovano identified soil and ground water contamination at the Bovano property. The recent analysis of ground water from existing, and the two new ground water monitoring wells have further defined the extent of contamination.

TRC's September 1982 report also recommended best management practices to eliminate any potential source of ground water contamination.

ITEM 3 Bovano Industries has implemented, or is in the process of implementing the best management practices specified in TRC's September 1982 report. This included the elimination of the use and storage of trichlorinated solvents, and elimination of the copper sludge storage sump. A permit is pending with the Town of Cheshire for Bovano to dispose of all this waste to the municipal sanitary sewer. The only outstanding best management practice not implemented by Bovano to date is the upgrading of the chemical storage area with an impervious floor and spill containment berm.

The recent ground water analysis has shown levels of trichlorinated solvents only slightly above state drinking water standards in two wells on site. Based on this data, and the fact that all use and storage o£ such compounds has stopped, TRC does not feel that any ground water remediation is necessary.

ITEMS 4 & 5 These items simply outline schedules for implementation of the above items.

In conclusion, TRC feels upon completion the upgrading of the

;chemical storage area, and connection to the municipal sanitary sewer

system that Bovano Industries will be in compliance with the Connecticut

5EP's May 22, 1984 Stipulated Judgement.

APPENDIX 1

I

B-SURFACE SPECIALISTS P.O. BOX 69. SEYMOUR, COIMN.

SERVING : Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont Maine, New Hampshire, New York , New Jersey. Pennsylvania

INIEGRIirY EXPERIENCE [Hollow Stem Auger Borings

Dry Sample Borings nt TRC Environmental Consultants, Inc.

Piston Samples

ject Bovano Rock Coring

:ation^ Cheshire. Conn. | Shelby Tubes

Nitect, Piezometers

ineer

Mineral Exploration

M.K.

ler Assistant JLik Seismic SuiVeys

Shallow Caissons

samples and/ar rock core samples delivered ft request. Engineering Reports

Seymour 888-3857 •

SUB-SURFACE SPECIALISTS • P. 0. BOX 69, SEYMOUR, CONN. SERVING: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania

eticut Test Borings, SOILS CORRELATION CHART

PENETRATION RESISTANCE & SOIL PROPERTIES

Predominant sand and gravel Predominant silt and clay

OHESIONLESS SOILS COHESIVE SOILS COMPRESSIVE

lows per foot Relative Density Blows per foot Consistency Strength (qu1

Uto 4 very loose Oto 2 very soft below .25 4 to 10 loose 2to 4 soft .25 to .50 0 to 30 medium 4 to 8 medium .50 to 1.0 10 to 50 dense 8 to 15 stiff 1 to 2 iver 50 very dense 15 to 30 very stiff 2 to 4

over 30 hard over 4

NOTES: Above based on 2" O.D. sampler x 1-3/8' i.d. 140 Wt.x30"Fall(qu< Tons per square Foot

STATE OF CONNECTICUT BASIC BUILDING CODE

TABLE 15. PRESUMPTIVE SURFACE BEARING VALUES OF FOUNDATION MATERIALS

CLASS OF MATERIA L Tons per — — — n ^ . i i i i m n « — ^ — ^ ^ — H I — i. « •MM — ^ — — , ^ m l m m m m ^ —

Massive crystalline bed rock including granite, diorite, gneiss, trap rock hard Square Foot

limestone and dolomite. 100

Foliated rock including bedded limestone, schist and slate in sound condition. 40

Sedimentary rock including hardshales, sandstones, and thoroughly cemented conglomerates. 25

Soft or broken bed rock (excluding shale) and soft limestone. 10

Compacted, partially cemented gravels, sand and hardpan overlying rock. 10

Gravel and sand-gravel mixtures. 6

Loose gravel, hard dry clay, compact coarse sand, and soft shales. 4

Loose, coarse sand and sand-gravel mixtures and compact fine sand (confined). 3

Loose medium sand (confined), stiff clay. 2

Soft broken shale, soft clay. 1.5

HOLLOW STEM AUGERING • DRY SAMPLING • UNDISTURBED SAMPLING • PIEZOMETER INSTALLATIONS • CORE BORINGS

SOIL SAMPLING LOG TESTA RT 5- 2 9 - ZL\ SHEET 1 OF 1

CONNECTICUT TEST BORINGS, INC. =;H <- '.'n PJi. PROJ. NO

Sub-Surface Specialists

GHT Cp HAMMER 140 • 3QEL" LOCATION C h e s h i r e , Conn. P.O. BOX 69

30" ISC" SEYMOUR. CONNECTICUT LINE & STA. ( ^ovano j MMER FALL

GRC )UNO WATER OBSERVATIONS (203) 888-3857 OFFSET

T I M tDAT1: UfcMM

5-20-8i+ 0 h r s . 5* ESPECIALLY COMPILED FOR GROUND ELEVATION

TEC i^nvironmental C o n s u l t a n t s , I n c . HOLE- NO. MW-E

CASING SAMPLER CORE BARREL 300 Connec t icu t Boulevard UPLER O-D. Z i.u. 1 J / O "

iLast H a r t f o r d , Conn. 0ol08 TYPE . . . .TT* 3E OF RIIG Xl .V'^_L(a,LU.j .« i w w . i , y

S I Z E L D . . . ^ : 1.3/s:: BLOWS PER 6"

SAMPLE ON SAMPLER DENSITY PROFILE FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF SOILS SAMPLE 3EPTH NO. Type OR CHANGE

TO DEPTHS of From CONSIST. DEPTH REMARKS NO. PEN JRFACE ELEV. FT. Sample

0-6 6-12 12-18 MOISTURE ELEV.

4" Traprock f i l l . Bed b r . f - c sand, some f-c g r a v e l , l i t , s i l t , l i t . c o b b l e s .

5'to 33 2.5 50 60 V.Dense 5%6"

1 18 8 o ' o " wet Red b r . f -c sand and f -c g r a v e l , some

cobb le s , l i t . s i l t ,

9* io'to 9 11 \*> H,Gomp Bed b r . f - c sand, l i t . f -c g r a v e l , t r . 9 18 10

• 10 11 *6" wet s i l t , t r # c o b b l e s .

1 5 ' t o ss 9 11 6 l-i.Gom'D Same 3 l b 0

i 6 , 6 " wet

2 0 ' t o 33 <50/r ;" 1 V.Lense k * 5• 20 2 0 , 6 " 1

2 0 ' 5 ' wet Bed b r . s i l t , some f -c sand, l i t . c l a y ,

21 • l i t . f -c g r a v e l . Refusa l on HSA on rock o r bou lde r .

Bottom of bo r ing 2 1 * .

KOTSi I n s t a l l e d 2 2 ' 6 " of 2" PVG water obse rva t ion p ipe K / 1 5 1 of f a b r i c 30 covered screen 20 ' below grade , 2*6" above g r a d e . I n s t a l l e d Ben ton i t e s e a l from 2 , 6 " to 6" , I n s t a l l e d s t e e l p r o t e c t i v e p ipe w/ locking cap 3 ' above p rade . Well was developed.

I40 — Proportions used, trcn< — 0-10%, littla ^ 10-20%, mme — 20-35%. and — 33-50%

TOTAL FOOTAGE; DRILLER:

HELPER:

SOILS ENGINEER

h . j i .

i ' i . r i . _

SAMPLE TYPE

C CORED W = WASHED SS = SPLIT SPOON UP — UNDISTURBED PISTON

COHESIONLESS DENSITY 0-10 LOOSE

1030 MED. COMP. 30-50 DENSE

Earth Boring

Rock Coring

Ft.

Ft.

DRILLING tNS°ECTO* -TRt ?T TP = TEST PIT

- UNDISTURBED THINWALL 5 0 + VERY DENSE HOLE NO.

/ s

SOIL SAMPLIN G LOG E START_ >29-u4 SHEET i OF

CONNECTICUT TEST BORINGS, INC. E FINISH .-29-84 PROJ. NO

Sub-Surface Specialists

3HT OF HAMMER 140 X3QK LOCATSON Cheshi re , Conn. P.O. BOX 69

1MER FALL 30" 23C' SEYMOUR, CONNECTICU T LINE & STA. Bovanoj (203) 888-3857

GROUND WATER OBSERVATIONS OFFSET

DATE T I M E DEPTH

29-34 P . h r s . 8 '6" ESPECIALLY COMPILE D FOR GROUND ELEVATION

T3C environmental Consultants, Ir.c HOLE. NO. MW-F

CASING SAMPLER CORE BARREL 800 Connecticut Boulevard IPLER O.D. 2" ID- 1 3/8"

TYPE E OF RIG Hydrau l ic Rotary j&st Hartford, Conn. 06lQ8

1.3/8" SIZE I.D,

BLOWS PER 6" SAMPLE DENSITY PROFILE

EPTH NO. Type ON SAMPLER

OR CHANGE FIELD IDENTIFICATION OF SOILS

SAMPLE

iLOW DEPTHS of CONSIST. DEPTH REMARKS NO. PEN REC. RFACE ELEV- FT. Sample 6-12 12-1 MOISTURE ELEV.

2" j31ktop,

5 ' to 12 49 53 V.Dense Red "or. f-c sand and c-f gravel , some 18 17

b'b' dry cobbles, l i t . s i l t .

9' lO' to 00 22 18 13 Dease Bed br. f-c sand, some f-c gravel, lit. m12 ' 31 wet cobbles, tr. silt.

15' to So 42 1 1 _2i Dense oame 13 T b 1 ^ wet

18' Hed b r . f - c sand, l i t . f -c g r a v e l , t r . cobb le s , t r . s i l t .

2 5Ho 11 12 13 i'i, Gomp ^aiae 4 24 22 27 V. J A

30 Ho 0 0 11 14 11. Gomp Same I t lt> 3 1 ' 6 " wet

34' iottom of bor ing 34 ' .

l^OTSi I n s t a l l e d 3 5 ' of 2" PVG water ob s e r v a t i o n p ipe 3̂ +' below grade , 1 ' abbve grade w/251 of fabric covered screen,

I1In s t a l l ed 1' bentonite seal from 2' In s t a l l ed 51 p ro t , pipe 2* above grade vr/looklng oap. ' r t J n uas deva lued .

Proportions u M d ; troc» — 0-10%, little = 10-2(f%, sonic = 20-35%, and = 35-50%

DRIUERi i ' - . A . SAMPLE TYPE COHESIONLESS DENSITY

IOIAL K J U I A O i :

HELPER: l " * » l l . C = CORED W = WASHED 0-10 LOOSE Earth Boring Ft.

SS =: SPLIT SPOON 10-30 MED. COMP. SOILS ENGINEER / ' ' " ' ' ; _-. . UP - UNDISTURBED PISTON 30-50 DENSE Rock Coring Ft.

5 0 + VERY DENSE DRILLING INSPECTOR ~ f "•"-*-"-- **a~it i V * - 0 ! K' -.. TP = TEST PIT UT .- UNDISTURBED THINWALL HOLE NO.

APPENDIX 2

SCO Connecticut Boulevard Environmental East Hartford, Connecticut 06108 Consultants, Inc. (203) 289-3631

ITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAIL

; Project * 2661-N51-00 Page 1 of — 1 Boring # ' m'E

jject J S ™ °

PTH ELEV. Top Cap: Locking steel

3 ? 164.47 '

0 161.70*

it 161 .20 '

5" 159.20

^6" 154.20 '

! ' 6 " 139.20 '

NOT TO SCALE BT Boring Termination

1

300 Connecticut Boulevard Environmental East Hartford, Connecticut 061 OS Consultants. Inc. (203J 233^631

MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAIL

: Project * 2661-N51-00 Page — 1 of -1 Boring # MW F

iject — Bovano

Top Cap: Locking steel PTH ELEV.

2' 165.86'

163.01'

W-QU

161.01'

154.01'

&.0 129.01'

NOT TO SCALE BT Boring Termination

APPENDIX 3

SOUTH CENTRAL CONNECTICUT REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY 90 Sargent Drive, New Haven, CT 06511

203) 624-6671, Extension 364 Laboratory Certification //PH-0411

Laboratory Report: ORGANICS ANALYSES

ner : BftuanO Sample L o c a t i o n : C hcsh | r? e, H l ^ n

: B 3 1 Date of Sample: 4 " / ' i ~8M Date of A n a l y s i s : (g-3-0-8^

able V o l a t i l e Halocarbons :

j n d Results** Compound Results**

unethane JJk 1,2-Dichloropropane • 1

ite thane trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene

arodifluoromethane Trichloroethylene 5"0

chloride Carbon tetrachloride M Jl

(ethane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane

lene chloride cis-l»3-Dichloropropylen«

lorofluoromethane 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether

ichloroethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane

.chloroethylene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

-1,2-Dichloroethylene v < i Trihalomethanes:

.chloroethane AiiX Chloroform

chloroe thy1ene ^L Bromodichloromethane

i j Dibromochloromethane

Bromoform

TOTAL THMS: V

* values are expressed as ug/1 ND - None detected (Limits: <1.0 ppb )

rURE: TITLE: Chfmnf^f

NTS:


103) 624-6671, Extension 364 Laboratory Certification 0PH-O411


ler: CUP^, Uj^e, Sample Location: frUjafl

: C U Date of Sample: ^ ' l ^ - g M Date of Analysis: 6"<P-Q"84'

ble Volatile Halocarbons:

nd Resul ts** Compound R e s u l t s * *

nethane NJb 1,2-Dichloropropane WD

ethane trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene

rodifluoromethane Trichloroethylene 3 4 chloride Carbon tetrachloride JL

! thane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane

sne chloride cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene

srofluoromethane 2-Chloroethy1vinyl ether

:hloroethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane <\

hloroethylene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane jy.L\

• i,2-Dichloroethylene Trihalomethanes:

hloroethane Chloroform

tloroethylene >< Bromodichloromethane

Dibromochloromethane

Brotnoform

TOTAL THMS: •4/

* values are expressed as ug/1 ND « None d e t e c t e d ( L i m i t s : < 1 . 0 ppb )

RE: U<JA^n (JjL&*A TITLE: CJhen^l/S'f'

S:


!03) 624-6671, Extension 364 Laboratory Certification C/PH-0411


ler: 600cm n : 5 ^ 4 Date of Sample: &~t $-&*-{

ible Volatile Halocarbons:

ind Results**

methane Mb

le thane

•rodi fluoromethane

chloride

ethane

ene chloride

orofluoromethane

chloroethane

zhloroethylene

1,2-Dichloroethylene

=hloroethane

hloroethylene — i *

** values are expressed as ug/1

URE: fP..-h*<-Ufa

Sample Location: CKeALrLf L J o M A

Date of Analysis: fc-30^81-/

Compound Results**

1,2-Dichloropropane MC>

trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene

Trichloroethylene

Carbon tetrachloride

1,1,2-Trichloroethane

cis-1,3-Dichloropropylenc

2-Chloroethylvinyl ether

1,1,1-Trichloroethane

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

Trihalomethanes:

Chloroform

Bromodi chloromethane


Bromoform

TOTAL THMS: N /

ND • None d e t e c t e d ( L i m i t s : <1.0 ppb )

TITLE: ZMJA +

TS:


(203) 624-6671, Extension 364 Laboratory Certification //PH-0411


omer: So Who Sample Location: l_ he S k i w %_ I H U E

* : 8 l 4 Date of Sample: (e~ I *V ff^ Date of Analysis: (o~ ^ 0 ^ 8 ̂

eable Volatile Halocarbons;

ound R e s u l t s * * Compound Results**

romethane Mb 1,2-Dichloropropane Mb

omethane trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene

lorodifluoromethane Trichloroethylene <l 1 chloride Carbon tetrachloride Al H -oethane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane

plene chloride cis-1,3-Dichloropropylene

ilorofluoromethane 2-Chloroethy1vinyl ether

Jichloroethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane

ichloroethylene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

i-1,2-Dichloroethylene Trihalomethanes:

ichloroethane Chloroform

Lchloroethylene \ / Bromodichloromethane

S: Dibromochloromethane

Bromoform

TOTAL THMS: v * * values are expressed as ug/1 ND • None detected (Limits: <1.0 ppb )

TURE: Wh.,.£/? fa V TITLE: CA^pyl/S't

NTS:


203) 624-6671, Extension 364 Laboratory Certification tfPH-0411


mer: Rf^M <XY\ Q Sample Location: tVUO^r

# : A 3 R Date of Sample: ^>-|^-R4 Date of Analysis: (o-SiO'SH

able Volatile Halocarbons:

und Results** Compound Results**

jmethane Mb 1,2-Dichloropropane N)£>

methane trans-1,3-Dichloropropylene

orod i f1uoromethane Tr i ch1oroe t hy1ene 1.0

chloride Carbon tetrachloride ten. >ethane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane

lene chloride cxs-1,3-Dichloropropylenc

lorof luorotne thane 2-Chloroethylvinyl ether

ichloroethane 1,1,1-Trichloroethane

chloroethylene 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

I-1,2-Dichloroethylene Trihalomethanes:

chloroethane Chloroform

chloroethylene V Bromodichloromethane


Br onto form

TOTAL THMS: v ** values are expressed as ug/1 ND * None detected (Limits: <1.0 ppb )

rURE: f ftiTASt. TITLE: C h^Ai.<k-

ITS'

APPENDIX 4

NO. CV-83-02886'*6S

STANLEY J . PAC, COMMISSIONER OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION : SUPERIOR COURT

VS. : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ NEW BRITAI N AT HARTFORD

BOVANO INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED : MAY 22, 198Jt

MOTION FOR STIPULATED JUDGMENT

The pa r t i e s to the captioned matter hereby s t i pu l a t e that the following order may

enter as the judgment of the Court in th i s case:

1. Oi or before May 30, 198**, the defendant wi l l verify to the Commissioner of

Environmental Protection that two addi t ional monitoring wells have been i n s t a l l ed ,

one a t the southern edge of the parking area of the defendant 's f a c i l i t y and the

other a t the south of the office building located on the defendant 's property, both

of which are shown on a map attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and marked as 1 and 2

respec t ive ly .

2. On or before June 30, 1984, the defendant wi l l submit for the review,

comment and/or approval of the Commissioner of Environmental Protection a report

de t a i l i ng the extent and degree of ground water, surface water and so i l

contamination, i f any, and proposed remedial act ions ("the plan") to a l l ev i a t e the

contamination, i f any any, a t the defendant 's f a c i l i t y . TMs report shal l a lso

contain a plan to provide for best management prac t ices for industr ial chemical

s torage, usage and waste handling.

3. If the Commissioner of Environmental Protection approves the plan to which

reference is made in No. 2 above, the defendant 3hall begin Implementation thereof

within fifteen (15) day3 of its receipt of written notice of such approval. If the

Commissioner, after reviewing the plan, proposes to reject it or to accept it only

with modifications, he shall notify the defendant in writing of such proposed actions

and within fifteen (15) days of the receipt of this notice by the defendant, the

Commissioner or his representatives shall meet with the defendant so that the

defendant may be heard with re3pect to the proposed actions. Following- this meeting,

and after considering the comments of the defendant, the Commissioner shall notify

the defendant in writing of its final action on the plan. Within fifteen (IS) days

of its receipt of this notice, the defendant shall commence to undertake the remedial

actions called for by the notice.

4. Cn or before the sixtieth (60th) day following the initiation of plan

implementation, defendant will verify to the Commissioner that all necessary

construction of the remedial actions have been completed and that all best management

practices have been implemented.

5. For good cause shown, the time limitations contained in this order may W-

extended by the Court pursuant to an appropriate motion and the Court shall have

continuing jurisdiction to monitor this order Cor this purpose.

_ • " !

TECHNICAL REPORT ON GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION · 2021. 6. 24. · e finish .-29-84 proj. no...

Documents

Transcript of TECHNICAL REPORT ON GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION · 2021. 6. 24. · e finish .-29-84 proj. no...