From: | doobage@localnet.com |
Date: | Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:12:42 -0800 (PST) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | Re: [CPEO-MEF] GOCO Facility |
Dear FM Without the details of the new tenant's situation I would like to offer the following: 1) Assumptions - the new tenant has leased the property. Sounds as if the GOCO folks, aside from the EBS, have not informed the new tenant of location of contamination; the EBS probably has not provided that information; under the Finding of Suitability to Lease (FOSL), the GOCO folks should have some type of institutional control which would warn the new tenant of possible contaminated areas. The new tenant is proposing a sampling program, only to satisfy himself/herself, and is under no order on consent with the environmental regulators. The remainder of the GOCO property is under a Superfund investigation. 2) If the tenant is just curious of the location(s) of contaminants, he/she should be free to sample and analyze in whatever manner comes to mind. After all, this work is to be done using his/her resources. Ex. - A trowel could be used to obtain a soil sample and just by smelling the off-gas, one could determine that a petroleum spill had occurred; or assuming that toluene was spilled, a Draeger tube could be pushed into the loosened soil and the color scheme would provide gross values of the off-gas; or with enough money a soil sample could be sent to an off-site laboratory with a request for analysis - such an analysis could be any ol' method that springs into the chemist's mind, as long as the method is accurate and precise. 3) Because the remainder of the property is under a CERCLA investigation, the Army's contractor is required to follow the CERCLA protocols laid down by the USEPA. In arriving at these protocols, USEPA chose certain sampling and analytical methods, chain of custody (borrowed from our legal brethrens), holding times for samples, redundancy of laboratory instrumentation, instrumentation calibration techniques and frequency, tons of paper work to mention some of the hoops to be jumped through. I think the chief reasons were to ensure court-acceptable data and uniformity in the Superfund program. But this does not mean that other sampling and analytical methods, not specifically required by the CERCLA protocols, are no good - they can be and are as good. 4) So, if the new tenant foresees the time when he/she will "hold discussions" with the deep pockets or GOCO folks, it would be to his/her advantage to go the full CERCLA methodology. If it merely curiousity, other inexpensive methods are out there - just check with a good lab. You can find archived listserve messages on the CPEO website at http://www.cpeo.org/lists/index.html. If this email has been forwarded to you and you'd like to subscribe, please send a message to: cpeo-military-subscribe@igc.topica.com _________________________________________________________ Enlighten your in-box. http://www.topica.com/t/15 | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] SciTech Next by Date: Re: [CPEO-MEF] GOCO Facility | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] GOCO Facility Next by Thread: Re: [CPEO-MEF] GOCO Facility |