My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CHRISMAN
>
25700
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0508450
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2019 11:58:23 AM
Creation date
5/29/2019 11:10:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0508450
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0008087
FACILITY_NAME
DDJC-TRACY
STREET_NUMBER
25700
STREET_NAME
CHRISMAN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95376
APN
25207002
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
25700 CHRISMAN RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2212
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• <br /> 6. Terminology <br /> Previous documents referred to the shallowest deposits as "Above Upper Horizon." <br /> This document appears to introduce the term "Shallow Unit" (an improvement) in . <br /> Paragraph 2.3.1.0.1 (p. 2-10). If these are synonymous and the latter is now preferred, <br /> "Shallow Unit" should be used consistently to avoid confusion. For example, Figure <br /> 2-7 still shows "Above Upper Horizon." <br /> • Please use consistent terminology throughout the report. "Above Upper <br /> Horizon" should be replaced with "Shallow Unit", if both are synonymous and <br /> the latter is preferred. <br /> 7. Lack of statistical approach <br /> The initial sampling phase was designed to determine the location of SWMUs with <br /> contamination above background. During the Phase I RI, a simple random sampling <br /> approach was used. One important factor that determines the number of samples <br /> required is the expected variability and distribution of contaminant concentrations at <br /> each SWMU. Section 3.1.2.3.6 of the Comprehensive RDFS Work Plan (Work Plan) <br /> presents three types of data scenarios and conclusions (based on variability <br /> assumptions) that may be drawn from the Phase I sampling results. Based on <br /> assumptions of variability at each SWMU, the number of samples was calculated and <br /> presented in the Work Plan. After the Phase I RI was completed, the data should have <br /> been evaluated to determine the validity of the assumption, as explained in the Work <br /> Plan, Section 3.1.2.3.7. However, the Phase I RI Report does not contain such an <br /> analysis to determine if assumptions were valid at each site. If assumptions were <br /> determined to be invalid, additional sampling may be needed. <br /> The statistical evaluation of the results is particularly important for those SWMU sites <br /> that are not recommended for further Phase lI investigation and which cover a <br /> relatively large surface area. These SWMU sites are 2 (North Pond), 7, 9, and 30. <br /> SWMU 25 (Boundary Road) should also be included in this category because of its <br /> length. Without a statistical analysis on the Phase I RI results, the recommendation of <br /> no further investigation on these sites is unsubstantiated. <br /> • Statistical evaluation should be performed on the sampling results of each site <br /> and the results presented in the Phase I Report. Recommendations for <br /> sampling or no finther sampling should take into consideration this evaluation. <br /> EPA 14FEB94 310 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.