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
8 . (Section 2 .3, Non-CERCLA Investigations, page 2-6; Table 2-1; and <br /> Section 5 .5.2, SWMU 6, page 5-12] Section 2 .3 states "Three UST <br /> sites (8, 21, and 31) were maintained within the RI as SWMUs 64, <br /> 6, and 24, respectively, because non-fuel hydrocarbons were <br /> identified in the soil or groundwater near the three USTs . " <br /> However, the discussion of SWMU 6 in Table 2-1 and Section 5 .5 .2 <br /> has no mention of a UST at this site, only a concrete sump. <br /> Please explain why SWMU 6 is considered a UST site. <br /> 9. (Section 6. 6 .5.4, page 6-7; and Section 9.7 .1.11, page 9-9) The <br /> text at the top of page 9 indicates the cleanup standards for <br /> protecting ecological resources at SWMU 4 are based on <br /> "Montgomery Watson, 1995e. " However, this appears to be <br /> incorrect since Section 6 .6.5.4 refers to Appendix D which shows <br /> that these values were calculated in November 1997. Please <br /> resolve. This issue was discussed at the January 9, 1998 <br /> conference call . <br /> 10. [Section 9. 8 .2 .5, page 9-25] The text states "For costing <br /> purposes, two-five year site reviews are included in the selected <br /> remedy" for SWMU 33 . Please omit reference to two-five year site <br /> reviews in this section of the text, as it implies that <br /> compliance groundwater monitoring at SWMU 33 may be limited to 10 <br /> years . <br /> 11. [Table 9-2, Performance Monitoring Network] Performance <br /> monitoring for SWMU 1/Area 2 does not include monitoring for <br /> PCBs . Section 9.6 .4 provides a detailed explanation of why <br /> excavation to cleanup PCB soil contamination is considered too <br /> expensive. Since excavation of PCBs will not be performed, <br /> performance monitoring for this chemical of concern should be <br /> added to Table 9-2 . <br /> 12 . (Appendix B, Figure B-12, SWMU 7] The full extent of Pit B is <br /> not shown on the figure because the data for Pit C is covering <br /> it. Please move this data more toward the edge of the paper so <br /> that the approximate extent of Pit B can be shown. <br /> 13 . (Appendix D, Calculations) This appendix needs an introductory <br /> page which explains the background and applicability of these <br /> calculations. It should also indicate that the calculated soil <br /> cleanup levels for the protection of ecological resources were <br /> reviewed with Clarence Callahan (EPA ecologist) and were found to <br /> be reasonable. <br /> A-7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.