Laserfiche WebLink
1 • • <br /> Pacific Gas and Electric Company Environmental Servicest' I�TAL HEALTII <br /> P.O.Box 7640 r'Ca.{{— <br /> San Francisco.CA 94120 r r�RVrCE <br /> Di es9t 3-7000415/973- 95 SEP 25 AM 11: 29 <br /> September 24, 1996 Telecopy 415/973-9201 <br /> James L. Tjosvold, P.E. <br /> Chief, Site Mitigation Branch <br /> California Environmental Protection Agency <br /> r Department of Toxic Substances Control <br /> 10151 Croydon Way, Suite 3 <br /> Sacramento, CA 95827 <br /> Attention: Mr. Fernando Amador <br /> Dear Mr. Tjosvold: <br /> Subject: Docket#HSA 90/91-08 - Stockton Former Manufactured Gas Plant Site- <br /> Response to DTSC's Comments on Phase IV Groundwater Investi ag tion <br /> Report <br /> The following addresses the Department of Toxic Substances Control's (DTSC's) letter <br /> dated September 6, 1996 which comments on Pacific Gas and Electric Company's <br /> (PG&E's)"Response to Comments on the Phase IV Groundwater Investigation Report". <br /> The September 6, 1995 letter states that the"Phase IV Groundwater Investigation <br /> Report", submitted to DTSC on June 11, 1996, is approved contingent on adequately <br /> addressing comments#1 and#2 of that letter. Our response to these two comments is <br /> provided below: <br /> Comment: <br /> 1. Response to DTSC comment#2 states "as outlined in Section 5.0, the <br /> recommendations regarding groundwater... are to assume a non detect line for the <br /> purpose of preparing the Feasibility Study". Section 5.0 does not include such a <br /> recommendation. DTSC concurs that an assumed ND line for Zone B along the <br /> perimeter of Area I and H of the Site would be beneficial to allow preparation of the FS. <br /> The assumed ND line can then be varied once it is defined and the FS could then be <br /> finalized If this is the direction PG&E proposes, then is should be clearly stated in the <br /> recommendations listed in Section 5.0. How and when the ND line will be defined is <br /> another issue that must be addressed in Section 5.0. <br /> Response: <br /> 1. A new page 64, which amends Section 5.0 of the"Phase IV Groundwater Investigation <br /> Report", is attached. In the attached Section 5.0, we have included a statement that, for <br /> purposes of preparing the Feasibility Study(FS), we recommend assuming a non-detect <br /> (ND) line along the perimeter of Areas I and II of the site for Zone B groundwater. <br />