SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

b. The first paragraph also explains that confirmation samples will be collected "from just above (1 foot) the capillary fringe or groundwater zone of influence/fluctuation. " As discussed during the March 3 technical meeting, in some cases the highest known contaminant concentrations were observed at shallower depths. As a result, DDJC-Tracy agreed to modify sample collection depths to correspond to the highest known contaminant concentrations for the site or portion of the site. This understanding should be reflected in Section 4 .10 as well as other applicable sections of the Remedial Action Documents. 5. Table 4-2, Soil Cleanup Standard Small Excavation Sites, page 4-8 As discussed during the March 3 technical meeting, the text of this section does not explain why soil samples will not be analyzed for VOCs at SWMU 20, even though the ROD identifies soil cleanup standards for VOCs. The text should be revised to explain that DDJC-Tracy will sample and analyze for VOCs in both soil and soil gas, following completion of soil vapor extracting (SVE) at SWMU 20, to ensure the site has achieved ROD-based cleanup standards for VOCs. 6. Section 4 . 10, Confirmation Sampling; and Table 4-2, Soil Cleanup Standard Small Excavation Sites, page 4-8 As discussed during the March 3 technical meeting, DDJC-Tracy indicated it was planning to report the analytical results of only the site-specific COCs listed in Table 4-2. However, based on further discussion, DDJC-Tracy (M. Cloud) agreed that a complete listing of analytical results for each method will be included in an appendix of the Remedial Action Report (s) , which presents the results of confirmation sampling. The Remedial Action Work Plan should be revised to reflect this understanding. 7. Figure 4-1, Decision Tree For Small Excavation Sites The term "cleanup goal" in one of the decision boxes should be changed to "cleanup standard" since the ROD identifies cleanup standards, not goals. Also, this figure indicates a site is "No Further Action" if: a) soil cleanup goals (standards) have not been achieved; b) a critical site structure will be compromised; and c) the DI WET sample results do not exceed groundwater cleanup criteria. EPA does not agree with this assertion. If a site has not achieved the ROD-based soil cleanup standard for a COC, even though a DI WET sample indicates no impact to groundwater, the soil standard still has not been met. As a result, an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) to the ROD will be needed. Table 4-1, and applicable text, should be revised to reflect this understanding. 8. Section 4 .12.3. 1, Storage of Excavated Material, page 4-11 In the fourth paragraph of page 4-11, the text indicates that the "bottom" of the UST at SWMU 20 is considered the "probable minimum depth of contamination." This implies that anything above this depth will be considered uncontaminated overburden. Unless DDJC-Tracy can substantiate why a leak from the top or middle of this tank is not possible, EPA 2