Laserfiche WebLink
2 . Section 2 .2 . 6 should be revised to re-evaluate and <br /> re-affirm the OU-1 ROD and ESD. <br /> 3 . Section 3 .4 states that the responsiveness summary <br /> will be presented in the Draft Final ROD. We do not <br /> feel this will be a sufficient time frame to review <br /> it. The responsiveness summary should be submitted to <br /> the regulatory agencies at a prior date or the review <br /> period should be revised. <br /> 4. Section 4 .2 indicates that cleanup standards for <br /> OU-1 should be reduced. This statement needs to be <br /> clarified. <br /> 5. Section 6. 6. 5. 2 needs to be more explicit in it's <br /> description of remediation efforts for human and <br /> ecological risks. <br /> 6. Section 8 refers to the no action alternative as <br /> being protective of human health and the environment. <br /> This not accurate, as F/S remedial decisions were made <br /> on the basis of risk to human health and the <br /> environment. The document needs to be revised to <br /> reflect that decisions were made based on risk. <br /> 7 . In Section 8 there are references to <br /> "institutional controls" as being part of the no <br /> action alternative. This is a conflict with the <br /> definition of the no action alternative and needs to <br /> be revised. <br /> 8 . Section 8 needs to be revised to clarify that it <br /> is the remedy that is implemented and evaluated and <br /> not the five year review. <br /> 9. Section 8. 1. 3 delays State acceptance of proposed <br /> action till the Draft Final ROD. We do not feel this <br /> will be a sufficient time frame to review it. The <br /> section regarding State acceptance should be submitted <br /> to the regulatory agencies at a prior date or the <br /> review period should be revised. <br /> 10. Section 8. 2 only mentions dieldrin in ground <br /> water. This is inconsistent with Section 4 . 2 which <br /> discusses all aspects of ground water contamination. <br /> All chemicals of concern should be discussed. <br /> 11. Section 9 discusses engineering variables, but <br /> does not describe them. Please revise the Draft ROD <br /> to include descriptions of engineering variables. <br /> 12 . Section 9. 2 discusses technical and economic <br /> (T&E) analyses for SWMU 10A. We have not seen this. <br /> JP.boi <br /> m:\smp-omf\hong\pinasco\JP33W.077 <br />