[Home] [Master Table of Contents]

[Meeting Minute Index]

Minutes for Kickoff Meeting
Contract No. F41624-00-D-8024, Task Order 42
Parsons ES 740911.02000


October 25, 2001 (Thursday)


9:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M.


Parsons Engineering Science, Austin, Texas


Kick-off meeting for Task Order (TO) 42






Brian K. Murphy


(210) 698-5208

Teri DuPriest


(210) 536-4745

Chris Beal


(210) 295-7417

John Yu

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6057

Susan Roberts

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6051

Scott Pearson

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6087

Ken Rice

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6050

Tammy Chang

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6092

Karuna Mirchandani

Parsons ES

(512) 719-6048

Minutes prepared by Karuna Mirchandani, Parsons ES.

The agenda for this meeting is presented in Attachment 1, and the meeting sign-in sheet is in Attachment 2.


The meeting opened with brief introductions. Brian Murphy went over goals of TO 42 :

24 wells and sampling.

Southwest corner of the base is the priority since the plume has moved off-post.

Geophysics will be undertaken on TO 58 prior to well installations on TO 42.

Brian thought that monitoring wells MW-1, MW-2, MW-5 and MW-12 should be worked on first. Position of new wells is still to be determined. Brian asked that Parsons consider constructing wells in the vicinity of Building 90 as recovery wells for eventual pump-and-treat remedial action. The wells will require a significantly larger diameter to accommodate a pump of sufficient size that can potentially create a zone of capture.

Scott Pearson also stated that making 3D maps for cross-sections would be hard as the wells were all in a straight line. He stated that MW-11 and MW-12 would help.

Brian raised the concern that the VOC detection at the MW-6 cluster may be related to Plume 1 rather than Plume 2. If possible, Parsons needs to consider a well placement between MW-6 and Plume 1 to assess the lateral extent of the plume towards the south, southeast, and southwest.

Teri DuPriest was aware that there would be schedule delays and instructed Parsons to revise the schedule for the progress report, and attribute the delay to coordination efforts for TO 58. Teri also stated that as the statement of work (SOW) had no specifics on well installations, additional wells could be added as a cost change and not an SOW modification. Teri also reminded Parsons that the annexes are not a part of the SOW. Brian reiterated that Parsons needed to be flexible as we gather more information about the wells.

Teri wanted Parsons to keep her appraised of any well changes or any work associated with well installation via email. Brian stated that it may be important to install offsite wells as the drinking water wells may not be the best way to determine lateral and vertical extent of contamination. Susan Roberts stated that Parsons has very limited knowledge of the downhole conditions of the offpost wells. Brian said that Parsons needed to let CSSA know that information would be needed to track the contamination. Susan suggested downhole camera surveys. Brian suggested removing well heads and adding some means for obtaining water levels. (measuring device or e-line placement).

Karuna Mirchandani reminded CSSA that the first round of groundwater sampling was scheduled for December 2001 and the Severn Trent Laboratories (STL) would not be on board by then. Therefore, Agriculture and Priority Pollutants Laboratories, Inc. (APPL) will be needed until STL can be brought on-line. Brian said that Parsons could start with well upgrades. Scott said that the water retention area(s) construction needed to start ASAP. He also stated that despite Greg Lyssy (EPA) being on board, a letter from TNRCC would still be needed with their approval. Also, in the interim, roll-offs will be necessary for containment of drilling water and cuttings. Water holding area(s) construction should not hold-up well recompletion/drilling work. Brian stated that if or when a pump and treatment system has been started, a holding/retention area would be needed as a temporary storage area. Brian asked if the water was treated to below method detection limits (MDLs), would a permit still be required? Ken Rice stated that any kind of release needs a permit as it is regulated by RCRA. Brian said that the current TPDES permit allowed a daily maximum of 77 ppb and a daily average not to exceed 36 ppb for PCE/TCE at Outfall 002. The region 13 TNRCC office didn’t agree with that. The issue is whether the containment of treated water is considered waste. TNRCC (regional and central offices) need to come to a resolution. Brian stated that Greg Lyssy was going to talk to TNRCC about the issue. Meanwhile, the backup plan would be to use roll-offs during the drilling start-up. Brian stated that as soon as Greg talked with TNRCC, CSSA and Parsons will need to determine the best location for water retention area(s), and Parsons would need to submit a workplan for the design and construction.

Action Item: Parsons to prepare a workplan for the water retention area(s) design and construction and update the cluster well workplans. 

Scott stated the need for a complete workplan with no references to the encyclopedia and old workplans, since all the amendments to the RL83 workplan has created a decentralized guidance that proved to be sometimes confusing for the field personnel. We shall, to the maximum extent practicable, utilize existing plans to create new cohesive and user friendly plans. Brian asked Parsons to consider protection for the cattle and netting for birds over the water area(s) during the design and construction. Ken stated that Parsons could do what was done for the PIMS study.

Action Item: Brian wants Parsons to keep track of inflows/outflows to GAC at Outfall 002. CSSA doesn’t want COC breakthrough, or the carbon to become contaminated to the point it would become hazardous.

Brian wants Parsons to inform CSSA about any problems with the current Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) systems. Any changes/additions can be included as part of this TO.

Action Items

Parsons needs to look at the irrigation system at Outfall 001 and 002. It may need to be added to this TO. Teri stated that this was possible under paragraph 4.3.30, 2nd to last paragraph. The 3rd paragraph could address the O&M of Outfall 002 and GAC. Costs and benefits of the proposed irrigation systems will need to be evaluated carefully before any construction begins.

Sampling for constituents stated in the TPDES permit also need to be added to this TO. There are no AFCEE QAPP requirements for the data generated for the permit. 

Compliance sampling for the off-post GAC systems also needs to be added to this T.O. Approximately 100 samples with a variety of TATs (72 hour, 7 day, 30 day). The DQO process will determine the analyte list. A meeting is scheduled for November 15, 2001 to discuss DQOs for this TO. 

Parsons needs to add O & M costs for the off-post GAC systems to this T.O. Currently, four off-post GACs have been installed. Additional GACs may be required in the future. O&M would include periodic changing of paper filters, tracking volume through-put, and “breakthrough” sampling between the carbon canisters.

Any deliverable generated for TO42 and TO58 needs to be sent to Pacific Environmental. They would need both a hard and electronic copy. Parsons needs to start a dialog with Pacific to determine their software requirements. Any deliverables that have been submitted to CSSA since Chad Hutcherson’s last visit to the base needs to be sent to Pacific Environmental. Deliverables can be made on a quarterly basis. 

Any changes to schedule need to be sent to Moe at WPI. 


Michael Ghazizadeh


(210) 321 - 5114 / (210) 525 - 8485


(210) 525 - 1801

Sampling of Bexar Met wells LS-2 and LS-3 needs to take place on a monthly basis until the GAC is installed. 


For groundwater monitoring under TO42, what is the lag time associated with elevated levels of VOCs during and after a rain event(s)? Parsons needs to propose alternative ways to monitor for this possibility. 


Parsons needs to write up an evaluation of pump and treat at Well 16.


Parsons also needs to do a position paper on the issues discussed at the USGS aerial geologic mapping meeting in July. Matt Wise or Gary Cobb can work on that paper. 

Chemistry team needs to do a position paper on the use of AFCEE QAPP (version 3.0) vs new CSSA QAPP. 

Susan needs to give Brian current costs for one groundwater quarterly sampling event.

In addition, Brian would like some costs for an on-site laboratory to analyze monitoring well samples; not drinking well samples


The samples will have standard QC requirements and not AFCEE QAPP requirements.


Samples will require minimal verification and validation


Costs must include the purchase of a gas chromatograph and labor involved with a laboratory technician


Include comparison costs for the same samples to be analyzed by Severn Trent Laboratories


Parsons must provide an evaluation and recommendation for the most cost-effective methodology selected.

Parsons can also provide an evaluation of which wells should be sampled over the long term, and determine what the potential cost reductions might be. This evaluation should consider semi-annual and annual sampling events of wells that have been monitored over a long period of time. No new wells will be considered for reduction in sampling at the present time.

DHL Laboratories must be contracted ASAP.

Brian asked that APPL contract under RL83 be extended to cover the December 2001 on-post groundwater sampling event since STL will not be under subcontract by the end of the year.

Brian asked that 4 groundwater fact sheets and 2 public meetings (2 events each) be included in the revised SOW. In addition, the standard letters that are issued to the private well owners after each sampling event needs to be generated by Parsons on TO42 after June 2002; this work is currently covered under an AETC contract DO 5084 which is scheduled to end in June 2002.

Carbonair is guaranteeing 0.5 parts per billion for 470 days at 150 gal/min at the Bexar Met well site. CSSA will need to talk with Carbonair to verify numbers at private well sites where GACs are installed to ensure they are aware of our current values that have been identified.

Brian would like Parsons to cut down on the use of federal express for deliverables to reduce project mailing costs. Using regular US mail is acceptable. An e-mail of transmittal letters as a heads up would suffice.

The STL audit is scheduled to take place on November 27-29, 2001. Attendees include Brian Murphy, Ed Brown, Tammy Chang and Katherine LaPierre.

The discussion was then focused on GIS issues. Brian stated that the CSSA database needed to be cleaned up. Ken stated that Parsons would make sure that both Parsons’ and CSSA databases were cleaned up and then synchronized. Ken stated that Chad has modified the Customized Hybrid Environmental Restoration Program (CHERP) database and the update would have to be done at CSSA as well. Chad can also set up report forms so that additional work in the field would be cut down.

Brian needs Foster Wheeler to have the same information/databases that Parsons has to ensure smooth transition. Ken said that as long as Foster Wheeler had the same software as Parsons, there would be no problems associated with the transition. Brian wants Parsons to set up the forms and database for soil samples associated with the remediation effort that Foster Wheeler is going to perform. Susan stated that soil forms for the GIS can be done on the TO58 project.

The first DQO meeting under TO42 is tentatively scheduled for November 15, 2001 at CSSA. Prior to the meeting, Parsons needs to identify what items should go into Environmental Resources Program Information Management System (ERPIMS) and CHERP, and what kind of samples need to be collected.

Action Item: Brian needs Ken to send CSSA the GIS handbook as soon as possible.

Background Discussion

Julie Burdey stated that Phil had several comments on the background report. Per the previous teleconference, an outlier test had been performed and it was determined that there were no outliers in the background data. Brian suggested taking additional samples, but didn’t know how it would affect the numbers. Julie recommended performing a distribution analysis. One of Phil’s other comments recommended combining all of the soil types into one data set; Julie noted that this recommendation has been made in the past by other reviewers. The methodology had been developed over five years ago and was based upon EPA’s requirement that the evaluation be based on soil types that occur at CSSA.

Action Item: Brian will talk with Greg Lyssy to determine if EPA will be receptive to a consolidated soils approach, and Parsons will draft a letter describing our rationale for this approach.

It was decided that any and all changes to background and subsequent changes to RFI closure reports would be done on RL17, however the reports would be finalized under the respective contracts.

Brian asked if Garner had updated the parcel’s UTM. Susan said Garner would work on that shortly.

Environmental Encyclopedia / GIS-SDS Discussion

Action Items:

Parsons should send CSSA an additional copy of the 5th Quarterly Progress Report. One of the CSSA’s copies of its’ Environmental Encyclopedia is missing this document.

Parsons should send all documents added to the encyclopedia since August to Michelle Campbell at Pacific Environmental Services.

Parsons should send updated copies of the electronic Environmental Encyclopedia on a quarterly basis. CSSA to provide list of recipients.

Parsons should contact Tom Heathman to determine what Parsons should send Informatics for their use of Petroview on the CSSA GIS-SDS. Informatics does not have SQL Server.

Action Item: In updating the community mailing list, Parsons needs to contact the homeowners associations for Jackson Oaks, Leon Springs Villa, Dominion and Hidden Springs Estate and incorporate the names that are not already on the mailing list. The Bexar Country Appraisal District also needs to be contacted for their list. Parsons also needs to include any and all small subdivisions across from I-10. Parsons needs to weed out the people outside of the ¼ mile area (consistent with the H-order) general vicinity (we should standardize the map view that we have) and revise the mail-out map. CSSA will do the actual mailing after Parsons has prepared the postcards.

Parsons needs to send CSSA a CD of the map of the people who attended the public meetings.

CSSA would like the next factsheet to provide latest groundwater data in January 2002. It was decided that there would be one factsheet with on- and off-post results separated out. Brian would like September 2001 data to be used for that factsheet.

Final Action Items:

Teri will need a modification to TO42 within the next 30 days and it will include the following:

Period of performance extension; since the laboratory cannot be subcontracted until January 2002, the groundwater events of September and December 2001 cannot be completed in time. 

Costs associated with GAC sampling and O & M.

Costs associated with additional samples collected for the TPDES permit, also includes new analytical parameters?? (pH, PCE & TCE is required at outfall 002), additional analyses per TPDES permit, required if water is used for irrigation) Need data from the permit to ensure we have an accuate accounting of the materials to be tested including soils.

Hours associated with evaluation of irrigation system and installation of them at Outfalls 001 and 002 per the TPDES permit.

Costs for additional hardcopy deliverables sent to Pacific Environmental.

Costs associated with 100 additional samples to be collected and costed for 72 hr TAT.

Hours associated with a position paper on USGS aerial meeting.

Hours associated with a position paper on onsite laboratory analyses.

Costs associated with adding letters to offpost well owners - starting June 2002.

Hours associated with Parsons physically updating encyclopedia updates once a quarter at CSSA, AFCEE and the San Antonio public library.

Hours associated with the addition of four factsheets.

Hours associated with revising the community relations map with most updated list of people.

Hours associated with adding 2 more public meetings, coordination and reporting and GIS map for attendees. e.g. Maps that are built on current layers and creating separate maps for each meetings attendance

Items for RL83 modification:

Period of performance extension till September 2002.

Addition of an extra round of on-post groundwater monitoring for December 2001 which cannot be done on T042.

Addition of post-GAC samples to be taken in December 2001, March 2002 and June 2002 at private wells off-post that are not included in T058; costed for 72 hour TAT.

Addition of non-scheduled off-post samples through June 2002; costed for 72 hour TAT.

Addition of on-post GAC carbon samples through June 2002; costed at 30 day TAT.

Addition of 30 soil samples with ERPIMS requirements; costed at 30 day TAT for full list of anlaytes and 9 metals (soils samples collected on TO42 prior to subcontracting STL.

Hours associated with updating off-post database.

Attachment 1 - Agenda for Kickoff Meeting, Monitoring Well Installation, Groundwater Monitoring, and Well Upgrades. Delivery Order 0042

Date: Thursday, October 25, 2001

Time: 9:00 a.m.- 1:30 p.m.

Place: Parsons Engineering Science, Austin, Texas

Proposed Order of Discussion



9:00 am – 9:15 am

Introductions; discussion of TO goals and issues

9:15 am – 11:15 am

Well installations and upgrades

11:15 am – 12:00 pm

Laboratory discussion

12 pm – 1:00 pm

Groundwater monitoring and GIS

1:00 pm – 1:30 pm

Outstanding issues

* Meeting followed by Westbay presentation on groundwater monitoring equipment

Attachment 2 - Meeting Sign-In Sheet